HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-02-23MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1978
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Mullins convened the regular meeting of the City Council
at 7:05 p.m. on Thursday, February 23, 1978, in City Hall Council Chambers.
II. PLEDGE - Mayor Pro-Tempore Jim McPherson
III. INVOCATION - Mayor Ed Mullins
IV. ROLL CALL
Present: Absent:
Councilman Jim McPherson
Councilman Alexis Newbrander
Councilman Roy Wilson
Mayor Ed Mullins
Also Present:
Councilman Noel Brush
Martin J. Bouman, City Manager
David J. Erwin, City Attorney
Paul A. Williams, Director of Environmental Services
Paul E. Byers, Director of Management Services
Clyde L. Beebe, Director of Public Works
V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS
None
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the City Council of
February 9, 1978.
Rec: Approve as presented.
B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Demand Nos.
78-073, 78-081, and 78-082.
Rec: Approve as presented.
C. STATEMENT OF CASH TRANSACTIONS FOR MONTH OF JANUARY, 1978.
Rec: Approve as presented.
D. REQUEST FOR REFUND in the Amount of $10.00 from the Palm
Desert Exchange Club for 'an Application Fee.
Rec: Approve the request and authorize the refund
from Account No. 11-3700-000.
E. REQUEST FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CONTRACT 1003, Palm Desert
Community Park Phase I Landscape Lighting.
Rec:
By minute motion:
(1) Accept the work as complete on behalf of the City.
(2) Instruct the City Clerk to file a Notice of
Completion.
(3) Instruct the City Clerk to release the bonds
35 days after the Notice of Completion has
been filed.
February 23, 1978 Page 1
F. REQUEST FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CONTRACT 1014! Improvement of
San Luis Rey from Alessandro Drive to Catalina Way.
Rec: By Minute Motion:
(1) Accept the work as complete on behalf of the City.
(2) Instruct the City Clerk to file a Notice of
Completion.
(3) Instruct the City Clerk to release the bonds
35 days after the Notice of Completion has
been filed.
G. REQUEST FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CONTRACT 1016, FAU Flood
Repair of Various Streets.
Rec: By Minute Motion:
(1) Accept the work as complete on behalf of the City.
(2) Instruct the City Clerk to file a Notice of
Completion.
(3) Instruct the City Clerk to release the bonds
35 days after the Notice of Completion has
been filed.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CASE NO. TT 11883, U. S. LIFE SAVINGS AND LOAN, Applicant:
Consideration of a Request for Approval of a Tentative Tract
Map To Create 65 Lots To Provide for a Condominium Hotel, 7
Single -Family Residences and 57 CondominiumlUnits on Approxi-
mately 17.8 Acres Generally Located Between Highway 111 and
Candlewood Street, West of the Palm Desert - Indian Wells
City Limit Line.
Mr. Paul Williams pointed out that this project had been
previously reviewed as a change of zone and development
plan. He stated that one of the major concerns of the
Planning Commission during their review had been that one
of the alternatives proposed in the Bechtel Report runs
along the east side of the project. However, since sub-
stantial development exists to the south, the Planning
Commission decided that that alternative was not probable
In fact, they elected not to recommend that area as a
possibility. Mr. Williams reviewed in detail the conditions
and special conditions included, pointing out that the appli-
cant was in addition, contributing $15,000 toward the resolu-
tion of the City-wide drainage problems of his own volition.
Councilman McPherson questioned how the drainage problem of
water on Toro Peak and Candlewood would be handled as now
the water tends to just collect and stand there. Mr. Williams
advised that some of the water would be directed through
LaRocca.
Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing open and asked for
input in FAVOR of the project.
MR. FRANK GOODMAN, 73-655 Shadow Mountain Drive, Palm Desert,
addressed Council as the applicant, stating his agreement
with Staff's recommendation of the project and all the
conditions applied. He explained that a drainage swale
would be constructed to the north, and that they have
already widened the most easterly lot and broken through
a wall to provide for drainage.
Mayor Mullins requested input in OPPOSITION to the project, and
none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed.
Councilman Wilson moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 78-18. Motion carried
unanimously with the members present.
February 23, 1978 Page 2
B. CASE NO. TT 11881, PHILIP ABRAMS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Appli-
cant: Consideration of a Request for Approval of a Tentative
Tract Map To Divide a 6.16 Acre Parcel Into Two Parcels, One
of Which will Be Further Divided As a One -Lot Subdivision
To Provide for 30 Condominium Units and Common Open Space
and Recreation Facilities on Property Located South of El
Paseo, North of Shadow Mountain, Between Lupine Lane and
Sun Lodge Lane.
Mr. Williams reviewed the staff report indicating that the
property in question had been before the City Council and
the Redevelopment Agency for a change of zone. He reviewed
the conditions of approval including the contribution of
$5,000 to the Traffic Signal Fund towards signalization of
San Pablo, payment of fee in lieu of land requirement under
the City Subdivision Ordinance, drainage fees, etc.
Mr. Williams concluded by indicating that the Planning Commis-
sion had recommended approval of the Tentative Tract Map by
Commission Resolution No. 331, and Staff was in total con-
currence.
Mayor Mullins declared the Public Hearing open and invited input
in FAVOR of the Tract Map. None was offered.
Mayor Mullins invited input in OPPOSITION to the Tract Map, and
none was offered. He declared the Public Hearing closed.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 78-17. Motion carried
unanimously with the members present.
VIII. RESOLUTIONS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 78-19 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE CANVASS
OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE 14TH
DAY OF MARCH, 1978, TO BE MADE BY THE CITY CLERK OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA.
Mrs. Gilligan stated that this was the last in the series
of resolutions Council will be asked to act upon as a part
of the upcoming General Municipal Election. By adopting
this resolution, Council will direct the Clerk to canvass
the results of the election and certify these results to
the Council on the 14th day of March, 1978.
Mr. Erwin noted that the date on the Resolution heading was
incorrectly stated as the 7th and should be corrected to read
the 14th.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 78-19 as amended.
Motion carried unanimously with the members present.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 78-20 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE
OF FEES FOR PLUMBING PERMITS IN SAID CITY.
Mr. Bouman explained the provisions of the resolution
pointing out that there were no changes from the existing
fees, just some additions.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to waive
further reading and adopt Resolution No. 78-20. Motion carried unani-
mously with the members present.
February 23, 1978
Page 3
IX. ORDINANCES
For Introduction:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 182 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ANNEXING CERTAIN CONTIGUOUS
TERRITORY TO SAID CITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ANNEXATION
OF UNINHABITED TERRITORY ACT OF 1939, WHICH PROCEEDINGS ARE
DESIGNATED AS ANNEXATION NO. 4.
Mr. Bouman stated that this was approaching final action
by the Council on annexing this territory which lies
generally north of the Whitewater River Channel between
Monterey and Portola. On February 15, 1978, LAFCO approved
this annexation request and forwarded it to the City for
action without the need for further public hearing. Staff
is recommending that Council proceed with the ordinance,
although there is a change in recommendation in that we
are asking that Council adopt it not as an urgency measure
but through the normal process. Originally, the developer
had requested that it be adopted as an urgency ordinance
as they were extremely anxious to proceed. However, they
have been held up, and the City Attorney would prefer that
the regular process be followed.
Councilman Newbrander moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 182 to second reading.
Motion carried unanimously with the members present.
For Adoption:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 177 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE 107, THE
PALM DESERT ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION
OF AN 85 ACRE PARCEL GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF HAYSTACK ROAD AND HIGHWAY 74.
Mr. Bouman stated that this ordinance was the zone change
associated with the Lewis Homes project. Between the time
the Council acted on the first reading and second reading,
it did go back to the Planning Commission for their considera-
tion and recommendation. Mr. Paul Williams gave the Planning
Commission's report, indicating that the Commission had
again reviewed the ordinance inclusive of any changes, and
had unanimously voted to remain with the 12,000 sq. ft.
lot size requirement. Mr. Williams read in entirety a
study and report from the Commission (attached and made a
part of these minutes as Exhibit "A").
Mr. Williams concluded by giving the Council the alternatives
they had including accepting the report and study of the
Planning Commission and electing to hold the second reading;
concur with the Planning Commission as a result of the study
and report and reconsider and hold a first reading; or
again consider other alternatives that were reviewed during
the hearing and select a different alternative. Staff
recommended that the study and report be received and
the second reading be held.
Mayor Mullins asked in anyone in the audience wished to be
heard, and Mrs. Betty Williams of.Lewis Homes spoke. She
indicated that the only guideline Indian Wells had in their
city was a 12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size with a 2,000 sq.
ft. minimum size home, and she questioned the Planning Com-
mission's comparison of the two cities. She also pointed
out the severe impact of the drainage problem on the Haystack
property, a problem which does not exist with the development
in Indian Wells.
February 23, 1978 Page 4
Mr. George Sweet, 46-370 Ocotillo Drive, Palm Desert,
addressed Council reading a resolution adopted unanimously
by the Board of Directors of the Palm Desert Property Owners'
Association in opposition to the zoning of the project. He
presented a letter of opposition (attached hereto and made
a part of these minutes as Exhibit "B"). He also stated
that the Property Owners' Association strongly supported
the Planning Commission and their decision, and urged
Council to do the same.
Councilman Newbrander moved to accept the report of the Planning
Commission and concur with the report. Councilman Wilson seconded the
motion with the amendment that a first reading be held of Ordinance No.
177 and with the amendment of R-1-12,000 as an acceptable land use.
Councilman McPherson responded to Mr. Sweet's statements
by pointing out that the objectives outlined in the General
Plan are there after countless meetings with the people in
the City to see what they wanted in there. The subject of
Open Space keeps coming up with regard to this project,
and Open Space in planned residential units is not enjoyed
by the general public because they have walls around them
and can be used only by the residents. He stated that a
10,000 sq. ft. lot is not a small lot. A 12,000 sq. ft.
lot is not our minimum size as in Indian Wells. The issue
of the City's incorporation to stop things of this nature
is not germain in that the project and zoning is in con-
formance not only with the General Plan but also with the
Zoning Ordinance.
Councilman Wilson felt that the logic of the Planning Com-
mission was that if indeed we were right to put all land east
of Desert Lily R-1-12,000 to protect it, then all adjacent
land should be R-1-12,000 too. Councilman Newbrander agreed
stating that this is a prime area all along Haystack, and
we should stay with the R-1-12,000 throughout the entire
portion of the property.
Mayor Mullins asked for a roll call vote, and the following were
cast:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Newbrander and Wilson
McPherson and Mullins
Brush
None
Dave Erwin pointed out that the vote took 3 affirmative votes to
pass.
Councilman McPherson moved to continue the second reading of the
ordinance until the meeting of March 9, 1978, when a full Council would
be present. Mayor Mullins seconded the motion. The following vote was
cast:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
McPherson and Mullins
Newbrander and Wilson
Brush
None
Dave Erwin stated that since Council seemed to be at an impasse,
the item would automatically appear on the next Agenda if no
action could be taken.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 181 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING AND DESIGNATING
CHAPTER 17 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE AS THE "PALM
DESERT PLUMBING CODE" WITH CERTAIN ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND
AMENDMENTS, THE RULES, REGULATIONS, PROVISIONS, AND CONDITIONS
SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN CODE ENTITLED, "UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE, 1976 EDITION", INCLUDING THE APPENDICES THEREIN CON-
TAINED, PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS.
Councilman Wilson moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to waive
further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 181. Motion carried unanimously
with the members present.
February 23, 1978
Page 5
X. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
None
XI. CONTINUING BUSINESS
None
XII. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 11680, J. M. Peters,
Applicant:
Mr. Clyde Beebe stated that this was for the dividing of
the Deep Canyon Tennis Club into four parcels for condo-
minium purposes. The subject parcel map has met all condi-
tions required for the approval of same, including the
special condition of grading the retention basin prior
to recordation. This map was approved by the Planning
Commission on January 3, 1978.
Mr. Bouman questioned whether or not the retention basins
were only for the new portion of the project as there is a
problem with the basins in the old portion. Mr. Williams
pointed out that the Design Review Board had required some
supporting retention basins in the old portion which will
alleviate the drainage problem now existing.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Wilson seconded to
waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 78-21. Motion carried
unanimously with the members present.
XIII. OLD BUSINESS
None
XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
XV. REPORTS AND REMARKS
A. CITY MANAGER
Mr. Bouman reported that the City is holding in trust $1,000
which was given by the Palm Desert Rotary Club for the
Community Park. However, it was decided at that time to
hold the money until the Park Foundation could determine
the proper use for the money. They have now decided to
install pre-school tot -lot equipment in the park, and they
have requested that the money be released. This can be
accomplished by minute motion.
Councilman McPherson moved and Councilman Newbrander seconded to
approve the release of the $1,000 being held in trust to the Palm Desert
Community Park Foundation for use in purchasing and installing tot -lot
equipment in the Community Park. Motion carried unanimously with the
members present.
B. CITY ATTORNEY
None
C. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Councilman Wilson stated concern over the traffic speed on
Fairway Drive and requested that a study be made as to why
it is 25 mph in Indian Wells, but 40 mph in Palm Desert.
Mr. Williams reported that a study had been made earlier,
and a recommendation of 45 mph had been made; however,
Council had at that time lowered it to 40 mph. The matter
will be referred to the Traffic Committee.
February 23, 1978
Page 6
Councilman Wilson also requested that the Sheriff's Depart-
ment be notified that the best time to patrol Haystack for
speeding offenders is 6:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Mr. Bouman
stated that he would advise Lt. Froemming.
Mayor Mullins requested that everyone note the future meetings
listed on the Agenda, and advised that the Study Session which
had begun prior to the meeting would continue after the
Council meeting.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
Councilman Wilson moved and Councilman McPherson seconded to
adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously with the members present.
Mayor Mullins adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.
1
7 i L�,y.,
`EDWARD D . MIIEL I NS , MAY0R
ATTEST:
SHEILA R. GILLI AN, CITY .' ERK
City of Palm Desert, California
February 23, 1978
Page 7
EXHIBIT "A"
CITY OF PALM DESERT
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Planning Commission
Report 0n: Study and Report on Case No. C/Z 12-77, LEWIS HOMES, Applicant
Date: February 16, 1978
The Study done by the Planning Commission during the interim period since Case
No. C/Z 12-77 was referred back to the Commission by the City Council indicates
no change in the Commission's original belief that the 85 acre parcel should be
developed with homesites having a minimum of 12,000 sq. ft. of lot area. The
Commission's justifications for their stance are as follows:
1. The logic used by the Staff, with apparent concurrency by the developer, in
recommending that the easterly portion of the acreage be zoned R-1-12,000
was that it adjoins R-1-12,000 on the north. This same logic can be used
with regard to the westerly portion because it will adjoin the easterly
R-1-12,000, if the plan approved by the City Council is carried out.
2. The R-1-10,000 zone on the westerly portion can be justified only on the basis
of its financial impact on the developer and on the selling price of the houses.
Since the land is located in an area which warrants development of the highest
order, the impact should not be significant.
3. The higher density of the adjoining development on the north and the R-1-10,000
across Haystack on the south should not be used as an reasons to downgrade the
unique quality of the subject land.
4. Further study has not revealed any new reasons to change.
In addition, the following summary by Commissioner Snyder capsulizes the Commissioners'
general feelings with regard to the Case.
The statements made that certain surrounding properties were of higher densities in
the area is one that needs attention. The creation of the conditions that allowed
these densities by the County Government is one of the reasons for Cityhood to be
voted in. The people of Palm Desert wanted more local say in the build up of their
City. If the people of the area want to keep Palm Desert from high density tract
areas they most certainly should be listened to.
The 12,000 sq. ft. lot minimum was not an unqualified, thoughtless number. The
City of Indian Wells has a 12,000 sq. ft. residential lot minimum. We understand this
developer is willing to build in Indian Wells under that criteria. It would seem
that one of the better residential sections of Palm Desert should be at least equal
to the least minimums of Indian Wells.
While it is true that the flood control ditch proposed by the developer is badly
needed it is also true that to use this land, flood control must be created. An open
ditch approach to this flood control, while being a good method, is also one of the
least expensive.
The current PR zone requires that 50% of the area be open space. While the density
can be higher due to cluster type building, the desired open space is still mandatory.
This is not achieved by allowing small sized lots in tracts with the house, garage,
and patios taking up a major portion of each lot.
We belive this is not a bad development and does indeed have many fine features. We
also believe that the people of the area and of Palm Desert do not want to see our
City turned into a tract of closely bunched houses with no open spaces to see and
enjoy. It would seem that one of our major concerns is to plan and provide the ways
and means to have a City commensurate with the desires of the people rather than
those of a developer. This is one of the last large pieces of extemely desirable
February 23, 1978 Page 8
EXHIBIT "A"
Case No. C/Z 12-77
February 16, 1978 Page Two
tracts of land. Let's plan proper development of it in a manner Palm Desert can
be proud of.
In summation, The Planning Commission requests that the City Council seriously con-
sider amending their original decision with regard to the minimum lot size.
February 23, 1978 Page 9
EXHIBIT "B"
PALM DESERT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
PALM DESERT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
73-833 EL PASEO PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE 346-2804
A Non -Profit Corporation
22 P'ebruary 1978
City Council
City of Palm Desert
The Board of Directors of the Palm Desert Pronerty Owners Association,
renresentinm more than 800 owners unanimously voted last night to
sunrort the Palm Desert Planninc Commission in its stand that 12,000
sc. ft. minimum lot size be made a condition of the annroval of a
tract elan for Lewis Homes,
The rDP0A resition has been made clear in annearences before the
planninm Commission and the Council and our views have not cha.ried.
1. The council, if it follows its nrevious annroval of
lot sizes smaller than 12,100 sq. ft. will be
•?errs `Ji n- the community of more oven snace in an
already himh density area.
? The arrument that surroundinv rronerties, other than
P'POA rronerties, already nermits density as high as
that requested by Lewis Homes is fallacious. Those
areas were annroved by the county before Palm Desert
became incorporated. Density planning such as these,
including; the now famous McEwen nro,iect were among
the reasons Palm Desert voted for incornoration.
There is no excuse in following the countv's bad land
use.
The sub.iect nronerty is one of the last large, highly desirable nieces
of land in Palm Desert and the Council should use this fact to un-
Prade, not down-sirade the lot sizes. Lewis Homes is a good developer
and can adl ust to the 12,000 sn . ft. requirement. The City planner,
Williams has nresented no comnelling reasons for the hi'her density
comnromise.
We feel the Council has a resnonsibility to back the Planning Commiss-
ion in this instance and we anneal to you to do so.
Very truly yo s?
)9
reorRe . Sweet
President
February 23, 1978 Pagel()