Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-10-11MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1990 CIVIC t,r rr i r it COUNCIL CHAMBER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Crites convened the meeting at 4:10 p.m. H. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman S. Roy Wilson III. INVOCATION - Councilmember Jean M. Benson IV. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Councilman Richard S. Kelly Mayor Pro-Tempore Walter H. Snyder Councilman S. Roy Wilson Mayor Buford A. Crites Also Present: Bruce A. Altman, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, City Clerk/Public Information Officer Carlos L. Ortega, ACM/RDA Executive Director Ramon A. Diaz, ACM/Director of Community Development/Planning Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Paul Shillcock, ACM/Director of Economic Development Mayor Crites noted for the audience that, with regard to the item dealing with the owner - built housing (New Business Item A), it was Council's intent to hear testimony at the 4:00 p.m. portion of the meeting and then to continue it until 7:00 p.m. This would allow individuals who were not able to attend at 4:00 p.m. an opportunity to speak on this issue before any Council action is taken. MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCPOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of September 27, 1990. Rec: Approve as presented. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. WR0907 and WR09 Rec: Approve as presented. C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Liquor Barn, Inc. for The Liquor Barn, 72815 Highway 111, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. D. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Victoria R. Carr and Gerard R. David for Gallery Cafe, 73-890 El Paseo, Suite R8, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. E. REOUEST FOR APPROPRIATION for Refurbishing of Christmas Trees. Rec: By Minute Motion, appropriate $2,000 to Account #110-4116-3060 for refurbishment of City Christmas Trees. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Amendment to Bylaws for the El Paseo Improvement Area District. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the amended Bylaws. G. REOUEST FOR APPROPRIATION of Funding for the Candlelight Vigil, the Humane Society of the Desert, and the Emergency Cold Weather Shelter Program. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the recommendation of the Outside Agency Contribution Committee to fund the Candlelight Vigil in the amount of $200, the Humane Society of the Desert in the amount of $7,500, and the Emergency Cold Weather Shelter Program in the amount of $2,020. 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT TY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * • * * * * * • * * * * H. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK for Contract No. 00-4, Hovley Lane Street Improvements. Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the work as complete and direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the Riverside County Recorder. Upon motion by Benson, second by Kelly, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by unanimous vote of the Council. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A None VII. RESOLUTIONS None VIII. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 618 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 12.26.010TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO PUBLIC SIDEWALK REPAIRS AND LIABILITY. Mr. Altman stated that this ordinance had been introduced at the previous meeting and that no changes had been made. He recommended its adoption. Councilman Wilson moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 618. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. IX. CONSENT PTEMS HEIR OVER None 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL Mr.. i u'iG OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF OWNER -BUILT HOUSING PROGRAM. Chairman Crites convened the Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 4:15 p.m. for the purpose of considering this item as a joint City Council/RDA Board matter. Present: Member Jean M. Benson Member Richard S. Kelly Vice Chairman Walter H. Snyder Member S. Roy Wilson Chairman Buford A. Crites Also present: Carlos L. Ortega, Executive Director Bruce A. Altman, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, Agency Secretary Ramon A. Diaz, ACM/Director of Community Development/Planning Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Paul Shillcock, ACM/Director of Economic Development Mr. Ortega briefly reviewed the staff report as well as his report dealing with issues brought out at meetings with residents. At the request of Mayor/Chairman Crites, copies of this report were provided for members of the audience. Mr. Ortega offered to answer any questions. Upon question by Wilson relative to issue #6, Mr. Diaz responded that the City could not control the number of related individuals residing in one home. MR. JOHN MEALY, Coachella Valley Housing Coalition, stated that it was his understanding that the City could not control the number of related individuals in one home; however, one of the requirements of the Federal funding source involved was that no more than two family members may occupy the same room, which is why the three - bedroom home would be limited to a family of six, with a maximum of eight for the four - bedroom home. Councilman/Member Kelly questioned issue #5 regarding resale controls. Mr. Ortega responded that the conditions of the trust deed were that all monies the Agency has put toward the project would be paid back with accrued interest. Administrative Assistant David Yrigoyen showed slides of the vacant lots and adjoining properties. Mr. Ortega stated that the purpose of this slide presentation was to show that the proposed homes would not be detrimental to the area. 4 MIN U 1h REGULAR PALM DESERT "ITY COUNCIL MEETING * # * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * MR. CLAUDE BROWNING, George Elkins Property Management Company, expressed support of the program, both personally and on behalf of George Elkins Property Management Company. With no further testimony offered at this time, Mayor/Chairman Crites continued this matter to the 7:00 p.m. portion of the meeting. At 7:00 p.m., Mr. Ortega again reviewed the staff report and Mr. Yrigoyen showed the slides for the benefit of members of the audience who were not present at the 4:00 p.m. portion of the meeting. Mayor/Chairman Crites invited testimony from the audience. The following people spoke against the proposal based on their fear of reduced property values, size of the homes, maintenance and upkeep, the fact that all 11 of the homes are to be located in the Palma Village area, and the possibility of other lots being used in the future: LINDA KIMBALL, 73-124 San Nicholas. VONDA HARRICK, 73-041 San Nicholas, read a prepared statement in opposition (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A"). B.G. JONASSON, 44-655 San Benito Circle. JUDITH LANGE, 73-330 Royal Palm Drive. BERNIE MACCORA, 73-375 Royal. Palm Drive, expressed concern that there were six additional lots shown by a title company as being owned by the City of Palm Desert (Lot #90 on Santa Rosa, #145 and #163 on San Nicholas, #228 and #244 on Catalina, and Lot #303 on Guadalupe). He also showed photos of similar housing programs in Coachella, Mecca, and Palm Springs. MICHELLE BAUMER, 73-460 Guadalupe. JANET JONASSON, 44-655 San Benito Circle. BEN WATSON, 73-280 Santa Rosa, said he was concerned with the problem of crime. IBOLYA HIDEG, 73-460 San Nicholas. MARCOS CERVANTES, 73-371 Guadalupe. The following individuals spoke in FAVOR of this program: VELMA SHARPE, 320 S. Calle Encilia, #C, Palm Springs, said this type of program was the only way she and her family could own a home of their own. ROGER WALTON, Carmel Circle. With regard to Mr. Maccora's concern regarding the six lots he identified, Mr. Ortega responded that he was not aware that the City owned these lots. He said he knew of 12 lots purchased by the City and that one had been traded away. He suggested that one way to mitigate this concern was for the City to agree not to expand the self-help housing program to those lots. 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Commeits/Ouestions: Wilson: Confirmed with Mr. Diaz that the present zoning for the area would allow a property owner to build a 1,000 square foot home and said that what the City was proposing was actually an upgrade to what could be built. Crites: 1) Asked what the maximum time limit was in terms of completing the homes and what would happen if not completed during that time limit. Mr. Ortega responded that the projected completion time was ten to eleven months but that there were no provisions if they were not completed within that limit. 2) Asked what was the total number of homes in this area. Mr. Ortega responded that there were 350 lots in the Palma Village area, minus the 16 used for street widening purposes, for a total of approximately 334 lots. 3) Asked what examination had been done in terms of alternate sizes of the homes. Mr. Ortega responded that the raw costs for a 1,500 square foot home, not including labor, increased from $92,000 to $104,000. He said the Redevelopment Agency would have to pay all of the additional costs. 4) If the program were approved, would the people have to go through the Building Department for plan check, etc., just like for any other home? Mr. Ortega responded that it was his understanding that the homes had already gone through plan check and that they met all of the City's requirements. Kelly: Felt this was a great project when staff first brought it to Council; however, realized there were problems when so many people attended the first meeting. Said he felt 11 units would not make a tremendous impact on the City's affordable housing needs. Said if only three or four were to be built in the area, it would be difficult to determine where to put them. Felt it might be better to look at an area where this type of program would not affect as many existing residents. Denson: Said that since incorporation in 1973, Palm Desert had tried to be a city that considers everyone's feelings. Said that after seeing what the City of Coachella was doing, this Council felt it would be great to do the same type of thing in Palm Desert but on a smaller scale. She added that having raised a family in a 1,200 square foot house, she could not see how a house of that size would be detrimental to any neighborhood or how it would downgrade existing properties. She felt that in the long run, these 11 homes would be an enhancement. Wilson: Agreed with Kelly that people who live in this area have legitimate concerns but felt there was a conceptual problem in fearing that this will be slum housing. He said that as a journalist and school teacher, he did not feel people with family incomes of $20,000 to $35,000 were inferior people who should not be in this neighborhood. He thanked Mr. Maccora for providing the photos and said he felt they told an important story. However, one detail that was left out was that the homes in Mecca were built to County standards, while the proposed homes in the Palma Village area would be built to City of Palm Desert standards, which area higher. The homes built under this program would be 200 to 300 square feet larger than those allowed by the zoning and would have tile roofs. Added that vacant lots tend to keep property values down, and once the lots are filled and the new homes completed, ,the value of the neighborhood would go up. 6 REGULAR PALM DESEW .ITY COUNCII. MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * : T * * * * * * * * * * * * s-•4 * * * * * * * * * * * Snyder: Said the Council does listen to its citizens and that he had been concerned about this area for a long time. Said he was not sure that all 11 homes should be in this one area and perhaps only a few should be done at first to determine whether this was actually a good program. Crites: Said that even though the zoning would allow 1,000 square foot homes, that did not necessarily mean that size home would be built. Felt comfortable with the development standards from foundation to plumbing, etc. Had no problem with the fact that the owners would have regulations placed on them relative to upkeep, even though no one else in the City had such regulations. Said one issue that was brought up over and over again was the size of the homes, and he proposed that the size be increased to 1,400 square feet to make them more compatible with others in the neighborhood. Said he felt this was the major issue and that the extra cost should be paid by the City and not the builder of the home. Wilson: Asked whether such a change in the square footage would cause additional delays in moving the project forward. Mr. Ortega responded that the contractor had indicated that although plans would have to be redrawn, it would not be a major problem. MR. MARTIN ZONE, Deputy Director of the Coachella Valley Housing Coalition, stated there would not be a problem as long as the size was not increased by more than 150 square feet. He added that there would also be increased utility costs, taxes, and insurance. Councilman Wilson questioned the plan check process. Mr. Diaz responded that in terms of overall timing, the grading plans would not have to be changed, and the project could proceed with grading while the rest of the plan check is processed. Crites: Proposed that the following conditions be added: 1) That the additional six lots shown as being owned by the City not be used for additional self-help housing; 2) That the completion time for the homes be one year; and 3) That the size of the homes be increased by 150 square feet. Wilson: Agreed with conditions relative to completion date and not using the additional lots in the Palma Village area. However, with regard to the increased square footage, was fearful of what it might do to the financial structure of the people building the homes. Mr. Zone responded that the loan might change depending on the income of those families. Kelly: Felt this was a difficult decision to make. Said that from what he had heard at this meeting, he was not sure this project should go forward. 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT TY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. * * * * * * * * * * * Benson: Said her main concern was with the size of the homes and would be in favor of the City picking up the additional cost of increasing the homes by 150 square feet. Said she would agree to all three amendments. Councilman/Member Wilson moved to approve the program for 11 owner -built homes (City Council Resolution 90-139, RDA Resolution 236), with the following amendments: 1) That construction must be completed within one year from the time it begins; 2) That the City of Palm Desert shall not build any additional self-help housing in the Palma Village area; and 3) That the size of the proposed homes be expanded by 150 square feet so that the three -bedroom will be 1,350 square feet, with the four -bedroom at 1,450 square feet. Motion was seconded by Benson. Councilman/Member Snyder added as a comment that he wondered whether staff had thoroughly explored whether the City could achieve what it is trying to do by selling these lots in the Palma Village area and looking into areas being considered for annexation. Perhaps the City could end up with twice as many houses for the same amount of money. Mayor/Chairman Crites responded that the cost of these lots versus the cost of other lots had been debated back and forth and that it was a weighing decision. Mayor/Chairman Crites called for the vote. Motion carried by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmen/Members Kelly and Snyder voting NO. B. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Palmer CableVision Update. Mr. Ortega stated that a written report would be provided for Council at the next meeting relative to cable legislation. 2. Update on Tri-Cities Sports Facility. Mr. Diaz reported that staff was continuing to analyze the study done by Frank Urrutia as well as the possibility of other sites for the facility. He said he would have a report for the Council at its next meeting. 3. Congestion Management Plan. Mr. Folkers stated that a report was in the packets and that staff would continue to keep the Council advised of what is happening. NOTE: The following items were added by Agenda Addendum posted on Monday, October 8, 1990. C. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL AND APPROPRIATION FOR OUT-OF-STATE SEMINAR FOR SECRETARIES (CITY MANAGER). Mr. Altman reviewed his memorandum, noting that he felt it would be worthwhile to send his secretary as well as the four Assistant City Manager's secretaries to this seminar. 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT TTY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *—* * * * * s * * * * * * He added that the program had been put on for 17 years and that this year's would be held in Lake Tahoe. Councilman Snyder moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the request and appropriate $6,000 from the unobligated reserve. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. D. REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF LYNWOOD__ FOR SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO AB 4242 (MAYOR CRITES). Mayor Crites stated that the City of Lynwood had adopted a resolution in support of AB4242 introduced by Assemblyman Willie Brown relative to regional government and was asking that the City of Palm Desert adopt a similar resolution. He noted that a subsequent letter dated October 1, 1990, had been received wherein the City of Lynwood had retracted its resolution in support of this legislation and had declared its opposition to all legislation on regional government. He asked for Council's comments. Councilman Wilson said he felt this matter should be referred to staff. He said there was a lot happening, including an effort by Cal State Sacramento to do an in-depth study of regionalization as a concept, and he felt it would be premature for the City of Palm Desert to come out against it at this time. Mr. Erwin said he had recently attended a seminar on this issue and that the speaker was Willie Brown. He said that whether it be in the format of this Assembly Bill 4242 or some other format by someone else, the Council should remember that there are some forms of regional regulation and control now. He felt it would be appropriate to refer this matter to staff to look at the entire issue of regional government. Mr. Altman stated that he and Councilmember Benson had attended a meeting of the Chambers of Commerce in Palm Springs. He said Assemblyman Kelly was the speaker and encouraged the cities to strongly oppose all of the regionalism legislation. Mayor Crites said he did not feel this was an issue of whether we are going to have regional government but instead how we are going to make it work for us rather than being something we are stuck with. He said he would support referring the matter to staff to look at it realistically. He added that he felt this was a good time to compliment the cities in the Coachella Valley because whether it is through the TUMF fees or whatever, they are further ahead in regionalism than most other areas. He said his biggest fear was that we not get pulled into the vortex of being part of some Orange County/Riverside County/Los Angeles County regional government. Councilman Wilson moved to, by Minute Motion, refer this matter to staff. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E. REQUEST FROM DESERT CAB COMPANY FOR RECONSIDERATION OF A RATE INCREASE (MAYOR CRITES). Mayor Crites noted there was a letter in the packets asking that the Council reconsider the requested rate increase. No action was taken by Council. Councilman Wilson recommended that the Mayor send a letter to Desert Cab suggesting that they perhaps reconsider their requested increase and try to get a broader coalition of smaller cab companies. He said with these accomplished, the Council might be willing to reconsider the matter. With Council concurrence, the City Clerk was directed to prepare such a letter for the Mayor's signature. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL AND APPROPRIATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO PORTABLE PHONES (MAYOR CRITES). Mayor Crites reviewed the report by Emergency Services Coordinator Ken Weller. Upon question by Councilman Wilson, Mr. Weller responded that the funds should come from the unappropriated funds because it was not included in the Emergency Services budget. Upon question by Councilman Snyder, Mr. Weller responded that he had contacted three different organizations that sell these types of phones and that the prices in the staff report were the best quotes he had received. Councilman Snyder suggested that each individual Councilmember contact the Emergency Services Coordinator and indicate what type of portable phone he or she wishes to have. He moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize staff to purchase a portable telephone for each Councilmember who wishes to have one; and 2) Appropriate the necessary funds from the unappropriated funds to cover said purchase. Motion was seconded by Wilson and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. XI. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL BY LOBLAND-WARING REALTY, INC. TO A DECISION OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS & CONDEMNATION DECISION TO DENY INSTALLATION OF A SPIRAL STAIRWAY AT 73-350 EL PASEO, PALM DESERT. (Continued from the Meetings of July 26, August 23, and September 13, 1990.) Mr. Altman stated that a letter had been received from the applicant requesting a continuance for one month. Councilman Snyder moved to continue this matter to the meeting of November 8, 1990. Motion was seconded by Bens(' Ind carried by unanimous vote of Council. 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT TTY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * _ * * • * * * * * * * * * _< * * * * * * * * * * * XII. OLD BUSINESS None XIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER None B. CITY ATTORNEY Mr. Erwin asked that the Council adjourn to Closed Session following the 4:00 p.m. session to continue discussions pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), pending litigation (Shah vs. City of Palm Desert regarding undergrounding of utilities), and (b), potential litigation. C. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. PROGRESS REPORT on Sunrise Media Bus Shelter Program. (Mayor Crites) Mayor Crites noted there was a memo in the packets and offered to answer any questions. Councilman Kelly stated that his concern was with the types of advertising signs on the bus shelters. He felt they were not at all compatible with the City's sign ordinance, and he said he would like to see staff explore the possibility of the City purchasing a few of the shelters every year and have a program where the space is used for public information purposes, environmental issues, public art, etc. Councilman Wilson said he was a foe of billboards and did not like unnecessary signage; however, he was impressed with the types of advertising displayed on the bus shelters and felt they were attractive and colorful. He commended Sunrise Media and said he felt the shelters with signage looked better than those without. He also liked the fact that the City does not have to maintain the shelters or change the pictures, signs, and messages, which it would have to do if they were owned by the City. Councilmember Benson agreed. She said she thought the shelter by the McCallum Theatre looked nice but did not like the signs for Domino's Pizza or Bud Light beer. She agreed they were performing a service for the community, especially during the summer months. However, she said she would like to see the City look into the costs of owning and maintaining the shelters. 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OL. i unr it 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Snyder said he was pleased that the shelters were available for the citizens and was not necessarily in favor of doing away with the shelters but would like to pursue whether advertisers in Palm Desert should be required to comply with the City's sign ordinance. He asked that staff discuss with Sunrise what rights the City had to control the types of advertisements on those shelters within the City. Mayor Crites suggested that staff be directed to: 1) Take a look at what the initial costs might be to take over the bus shelters; 2) Look at our contract to determine our rights with regard to the advertising in the bus shelters; and 3) Provide the City Council with a report on the aforementioned items at a future meeting. Council concurred. 2. AIRPORT FUNDING Councilman Kelly moved to add this item to the Agenda for discussion as one which came up after the Agenda was posted. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. Councilman Kelly stated that at the first meeting of those involved in the Palm Springs Airport funding and CVAG, it was decided that if there was to be regional funding, the transient occupancy tax was the best formula for determining how much each city should contribute. He said another issue dealt with some type of representation on the Airport Commission. He said that since there was currently a five -member Commission, the Committee's idea was to have it expanded to seven or eight members, with representation rotated among the cities based on the contributions they were making. He asked that Council concur with the approach the Committee had taken up to this time. As background, Mayor Crites stated that he had the opportunity to talk with some of the other Mayors recently and that the first issue brought to the Mayor of Palm Springs was that they would have to be willing to change how the Airport Board was potentially run before these kinds of things would be seen. He said they would be going back and getting a vote either this week or next to see if the Palm Springs City Council would be willing to change on that issue. Councilman Snyder expressed concern and said the Ontario Airport had gone through a similar process, with the Los Angeles Airport Commission running the airport and negotiations lasting two years. He said he felt the City of Palm Desert should not rush into this and offer to help without having some criteria set forth first. He said if there was going to be a regional airport, there should be a regional board of directors. Upon question by Councilman Wilson, Kelly responded that operational funds were not being requested. He said when the airport was first started, some City of Palm Springs money was put into it; however, it had been several years since any Cam" funds were contributed. He add ^ that the City of Palm Springs 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT ITY COUNCIL MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * OC rOBER 11, 1990 * * -f * * * * * * * * * * * represented about 35 % of the transient occupancy tax, and even though they were not putting in any City general funds or transient occupancy tax money into the airport now, they would put in on the same basis as the other cities. Councilman Wilson asked if this proposal would supercede any previous commitments. Kelly responded that the financial part of those agreements would be nullified and that this one would supercede the past agreement. He added that he had been assured by Mr. Ortega that Redevelopment funds could be used as previously decided. Councilman Wilson said he felt this seemed like an equitable formula since the majority of people coming into the Valley and paying the transient occupancy tax arrive by air. Councilmember Benson agreed. Councilman Snyder said he had no problem with the formula nor with the idea that Palm Desert should assist; however, he wanted assurance that the Committee would look into the concerns he had previously indicated. Mayor Crites stated that the Committee had this Council's support and best wishes. o City Council Committee Reports: • 1. ELECTRIC VEHICLE REPORT Councilman Kelly stated that he had talked to people in Santa Barbara and that the electric vehicle was not coming along near as fast as they had hoped. He said Councilman Wilson had come across another type of vehicle that was probably more technically advanced and which could be available sooner. He said he would be investigating this matter and would bring information back to the Council. XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B The following Palm Desert Middle School Students, accompanied by their instructor, Ms. Terri Andrews, addressed the Council in opposition to the Altamira development and presented a petition to the City Council signed by both students and voters in opposition: LaDAWN BEST, President of the Environmental Club ALYSSA EDWARDS, Vice President BREIA SANDERS, Secretary TRICIA ARMSTRONG, Treasurer 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mayor Crites recessed the meeting at 5:20 p.m. to Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9(a), pending litigation (Shah vs. City of Palm Desert regarding undergrounding of utilities), and (b), potential litigation. He reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. XV. COMPLETION OF ITEMS HEIR OVER FROM 4:00 P.M. SESSION Mayor Crites noted that only one item was held over from the 4:00 p.m. session, New Business Item A dealing with the Owner -Built Housing Program. He added that the Council would consider it following completion of the other items on the Agenda. XVI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None Mrs. Gilligan noted that two staff members from the City of Rancho Mirage were in the audience. She introduced City Clerk Barbara Dohn and Executive Secretary Marilyn Brockman. XVII. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF MARY DRURY. Mayor Crites stated that he and Councilmember Benson had reviewed applications on file. He said that both he and Ron Gregory, Chairman of the Architectural Review Commission, had interviewed Mr. Chris VanVliet and recommended his appointment to fill this vacancy. Councilman Kelly inquired as to this applicant's background. Mayor Crites responded that in filling Mrs. Drury's position, Mr. Gregory requested that the new member not be someone from the architectural field. He wanted someone whose expertise is in the practical side of building, and Mr. VanVliet is a building in both Palm Desert and Indian Wells. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Mr. Chris VanVliet to the Architectural Review Commission to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Mary Drury. Motion was seconded by Snyder and carried by unanimous vote of the Council. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT ITY COUNCIL MEETING v i vor.. 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s * * * * * * * * *-s * * * * * * * * * * * XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MASTER TENTATIVE MAP SUBDIVIDING 362 ACRES INTO A 484-UNIT COUNTRY CLUB WITH A FIRST PHASE OF 108 UNITS - A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR 25 ACRES OF DRAINAGEWAY FROM O.S. TO PR-5 AND H.P.R. AND A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. (Continued from the Meetings of September 13 and September 27, 1990.) At the request of the City Attorney, the following is a verbatim transcript of the public hearing dealing with the Altamira project: Crites: The next item on the Agenda has to do with a public hearing item, a public hearing that is open and has been continued from past meetings and is a public hearing dealing with a tentative tract map, change of zone, environmental impact, etc., dealing with a proposed building project. Mr. City Attorney. Dave Erwin:. Mr. Mayor, this is an item that's been continued several times for the purpose of allowing the Big Horn Research Institute and the developer to discuss potentials for settlement. That has not occurred to date. I have a couple of recommendations for the Council that I believe work in combination. I have conveyed those to representatives of both of those parties. It appears that since the Planning Commission review of this particular matter and recommendation to the Council that some of the objections, at least I believe the objection of the Big Horn Institute, has changed somewhat to create a larger buffer area between the Institute's location and any development on the potential property adjacent to it, which is the subject of this application. In our review of the existing alternatives before the Council, there is at least one if not other alternatives that has not been looked at and reviewed in any detail by the Planning Commission, and that is the potential for a regular subdivision north of the existing suggested line from the Big Horn Institute, that being a subdivision without a golf course but a lot and block type of development. There may be other alternatives, too. I would recommend first that the City Council refer that alternative, together with any others that might be available, back to the Planning Commission for their review and comment and at the same time to look at what, if any, increased traffic impact may be occasioned by that because my belief is that that may be for a larger or more dense project than is currently proposed, as well as any other affects that it may have that otherwise would be looked at in the environmental review process. This may necessitate the recirculation of our Environmental Impact Report, and I would suggest that be left to a staff determination at the moment whether that is necessary or not. The second item that I would recommend, and this is perhaps a form of what has been suggested by both of the parties, the developer and the Big Horn Institute, that the City Council create, authorize the creation if you will, of a fact finding group that would respond to the City Council determining, particularly with reference to the biological issues in this particular project, what affects do exist, what potential mitigation measures can be occasioned with regard to the Institute, and to make those determinations of facts or the existence of them or nonexistence of them, that that committee be in a form as follows: that each of the two parties, the Big Horn Institute on one hand and the 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * developer on the other, provide to the City Council three to five names of suggested experts knowledgeable in the Big Horn field who have not been involved in this particular project to date, that from that list the Council would select two from each side, and the City obtain a fifth individual as a facilitator and/or mediator for the purpose of keeping the process moving and concluding to the extent they can any of the factual circumstances that they may find, and that committee report back directly to the City Council. It would be my suggestion you authorize the creation of that and allow myself, Mr. Altman, Mr. Diaz approximately a week to put together a written format for that group to function. I would suggest as a matter of information to the Council that I would submit that format to Mr. Williams on behalf of the Institute and Mr. Burns on behalf of the developer for their comments. That is to say we would consider their comments, and we may or may not use them. But at least to allow them to comment on this process and on the individuals involved. And that this hearing be continued to your next regular meeting for the purpose of allowing us to implement these different items and report back to you the status at that point. Crites: Are there questions from members of this body? Wilson: No question. I would move the recommendation. Crites: Okay. Do you need a formal action by this body to do this? Erwin: Yes, if you would, please. Wilson: I would move the recommendation of the City Attorney. Snyder: Second that motion. Crites: Okay, that consists of two items. One, to take back one or more new development configurations to the Planning Commission for their comment. And secondly then, the creation of a fact finding, if you will, is that a fair term? Erwin: Yes. Crites: Committee of experts in the field to examine the data and the appropriate questions and to return a report to this body. Erwin: That is correct. And that the hearing tonight be continued to your next regular meeting, with the idea that by the next regular meeting I think we will have a better idea of the time frame that we will be operating within and a much better idea of when this hearing can move forward. Crites: So that at the next Council meeting, it would not be your intention to hold the hearing but by the next Council meeting to have an idea of when these two processes will be completed and a hearing could go forward. Erwin: Correct. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT 'TTY COUNCIL METING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .-.-* * * * * * * * * * * Crites: Is that comfortable and understood? Snyder: That goes as my second. Crites: Okay. There being no further discussion, would you please cast a ballot on this matter. Gilligan: Motion carries by unanimous vote. Crites: That then continues this matter to the next meeting, and the next meeting is not for hearing but for simply a report back on where we are on the process and how long it will take for that process to be completed, the results to come back to the City for our examination and hopefully for our help, and at that time a hearing may go forward. Those people who are here for that particular matter are welcome to stay. They are also welcome to enjoy their evening. XIX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - D None ' ' XX. ADJOURNMENT r• Upon motion by Wilson, second by Benson, and unanimous vote of the Council, Mayor Crites adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m. ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, CITY/CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, 'CiALIFORNIA 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ratan 1 'A' Mayor Crites, Mayor Prote■ Snyder, Council Members City Staff - Ladies i Gentlemen: I did not speak at this afternoon meeting as I wasn't sure how the time allotment works and as I am speaking here on behalf of many property owners of our community as well as myself, I hope you will bear with •e if I run over the alloted time for myself. We have listened several times to the city personnel and the housing coaltion explain their program and have viewed their revised drawing of the proposed houses to be built under the low income sweat equity program. The existing property owners of Palma Village have heard nothing or seen anything that gives any basis to accepting these houses into our neighborhood. We feel the city has singled out our community for the low income program. We feel this is unjust and if the city 4MH40444 44 that, 4u40a0tad at one point of doing, then they could just as well subsidize some of these houses to be built into other neighborhoods and spreading it over not more than 3 houses per community. The housing coalition showed an artist's concept of what they precieve the finished product to look like. Drawn at the skyview angle to appear like • very spacious house with all the lush landscaping around it can be very deceptive to what will be the final product. It was stated that we could not compare the value of these houses to what contractors costs would be because it is going to take them longer in construction than a contractor would take and therefore the value of their labor would be more than a contractor's. The time in construction has been a question that has never been answered. If the time uncer construction runs into longer than a year, what provisions are there for the city to take over and complete and sell. To completely frame out a 1200 sq ft house at contractor's cost would be under $3000, including light framing hardware. We have ask for plans and specs to look at and we were told there are no plans and specs at this time. We hardly can expect to get any insight into the value of these houses if there is only an artist's concept to look at. If any one of us came to the city and ask for approval and permits to build a house on artist's concept I feel we would have a difficult time obtaining any approvals for that structure. To say these houses have an appraised market value of s116,000 can be somewhat misleading since there are no plans and specs to obtain building costs from. An appraiser would not be able to put together a report that would be reliable based upon an artist's concept on a $30,000 lot in a given neighborhood. There have been numerous court actions resulting from decisions made based on artist's concept. The most prominent being, I think, is when it was ordered that several thousand purchasers be refunded their purchase price of lots in California City, when after a few years it was determined that what was the final product was not what the artist's concept had depicted. The final product was somewhat similar but lacking in true conformity. 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT 'NY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .. t * * * * * * * * * * * A.tuni i "A" They said this program has been done in Pals Springs and we could use that as a guideline. To build these houses in Ironwood or on Haystack would not upgrade those communities, however to build these houses in Desert Highlands of No. Palm Springs does upgrade that community. In visiting this area there seems to be houses that have been under construction for longer than a year and not in completion stage To build these houses in a community that the entire community is in a state of disrepair is one thing but our community is not that standard of community. We have many homes in the s1S0,000 market value range. It could be said that to injure a few by devaluating their property values is no big deal when you are helping 11 people obtain their first home. However, not only is that program injuring 50+ homes in the above $130,000 range this program injures all the homes in the under s130,000 range as by devaluating the uppper range you automatically drop the lower priced homes as well, and brings the average price down. Then when you take the figure of 200+ homes affected, maybe that is a big enough deal to take another look at. In Morgan Hill a development was done where they purchased the last two complete streets of an enclosed subdivision that had gone bankrupt. A developer several years ago built very small houses with cheap construction costs, then filed bankruptsy before the project was completed. The existing houses are all in a serious state of disrepair. When the housing coalition finished the last two streets out, the entire subdivision was helped as they had built upgraded to anything existing there and because the low income houses are new with fireplaces and several upgrades and the lawns freshly planted it has helped that neighborhood's overall valuation. That is not the case with Palma Village. We are not a neighborhood in serious disrepair. We feel there is some yard maintenance needed in some areas, however this is an issue that can be readily remedied according to city staff. We were informed a builder or individual could apply for a permit and build this same house. We know that is very true. However, a builder does not buy a lot and then build under the existing standard that is being built. He wants to protect his sale and business. An individual does not build his home under the current building standard of what is being built in a community as he wants to protect his investment in his -hose and his future. If he did happen to do so, it would be only one or perhaps two and not the large percentage that is being proposed here. An individual most usually builds upgraded to the last house or houses before him. We have been told that the city does not own sore than 11 buildable lots in the entire city. However, we keep insisting that several title companies show 17 buildable lots in our community alone. We have not had a response from the city when we informed them we could furnish copies of the grant deeds to all 17 lots to show ownership. Unless title has been 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * r.ArfBii `A' transferred in the last few weeks the title companies say these lots belong to the City of Pal■ Desert. We have a list of those lots, along with the parcel numbers, that are in addition to the 11 the city declares. We were told in the beginning that there were stipulations, and restrictions that these houses could not be dumped on the market or there could not be any financial gain fro■ the sale of the houses for a long period of time. Now we are told these houses could be sold and that the only requirement would be to pay off the mortgages and loans against them. Which, we do not see as having any restrictions that would protect our community from these houses being placed on the market to realize a several thousand dollar profit. A profit that would be realized only by being built in • neighborhood with homes valued several thousands above these houses and giving them an immediate windfall. In the meantime we have experienced our homes devalued by these houses being built there. I visited several cities in northern California and talke.> Directors of Redevelopment Agencies. I was not able to find any project true in nature to this proposed project. In discussing this type of project with various officials the one opinion that stood out was that it was not a concept they would have looked strongly at because it would not give them as much value per dollar spent as opposed to doing a small 15 — 30 house development together. The lot costs would always be ■ore in established neighborhoods. One reason being generally the lot sizes would be larger than what they would need for the size homes in this program. In Sonoma County the housing coordinator for the housing coalition there said they would not being doing any ■ore self help programs at this time. Everything they had on the agenda for the present and future are to be built out and sold to the low income in-.viduals. They have had the sweat equity program in their area for several years and was one of the pioneer counties to do this program, however they were not pursuing that program any further at this time. I spoke with several housing coalition agencies throughout northern California and it seemed the overall opinion was that the sweat equity program was not one that they were pursuing any further at this time. This say seem like a motherhood and apple pie issue to anyone sitting on the outside of our community, or to anyone who feels confident that their neighborhood is well above the price range that there is no risk involved in the city looking at their community, — this being a vision of the city subsidizing the lot costs, building houses for the low income and everyone living happily 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT TTY COUNCIL MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * EXHIBIT "A" everafter. This is not so when you live in the community, where your biggest investment of your life is in your home. People like myself who is ready for retirement soon and does not have the earning years left to earn back the amount that will be lost by someone underbuilding and underdeveloping to what is being built today. or the one who just recently purchased and invested their money into a community that on the suface looked like a good investment for the future. A neighborhood that was building upgraded with each new home that went in and several vacant lots that indiciated the community would continue to build upgraded and improve. Only to find out the city had bought those vacant lots many years ago and was going to build downgraded size and construction housing on them. To the people inside this community it is not motherhood and apple pie .,a The overall population of our community feels that if the city had informed them that to get the bond issue for sewers, curbs and gutters that later on down the road they would have to pay up by allowing downgraded constrution to be built in their neighborhood,-- then most feel they would have said thanks , but no thanks. L•*ve us alone and we will find other ways, more slowly perhaps but not as costly in the long run. We do not find any other houses within the city being built under the low to moderate income program, even though according to an interview with the news media they have been done in various parts of the city, however well hidden so that no one knows they are there. We have tried in vain to get information on them so we could compare to see that we are talking apples to apples. Two phrases of this program gives us reason for concern, "pilot program" and "if successful". We are not comforted when we are told that this is for the benefit of people who could not otherwise own a home and "if" successful mioht•be done in other areas. We have suggested to the city to sell these lots to builders and individuals and use those proceeds for the low income housing fund where a development of 30+ to more homes can be built and giving more people advantage. There seems to be some discrepancy as to the value placed on these lots. The city says they have arrived at a market value to the housing coalition of $27,000. per lot. However, in May a lot was sold on Santa Rosa Ave for $35,000. There are several lots listed on the market for 438,000. Several people have expressed a desire to purchase lots in this community to build their home, however they have not been able to receive any return communication from the city as to their intent to sell, at this point. We have not run any appraisals on the value of the lots, however it does seem that with as few sales of lots that has been in this area for the past year, due mainly to the fact the• city owns most all of the vacant lots, the lot selling for s35,000 would have some heavy weight on the value of the lots. 21 ND MUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 1990 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * r_Atuim 1 'A' The building of 11 houses in our neighborhood under the low income sweat equity program would have little if no effect on the mandated quota for the city, however it will have a long impacted effect on our community. One, that the community would have to live with along with the mistake of a two story building on the corner of Monterey and Fred Waring and the mistake the city admittedly made with Hacienda de Monterey, and the questionable success of the decision to renovate instead of tear down and build with new design and concept, the apartments on the corner of Monterey and Fred Waring. Priors that the community keeps coming back to the city and saying these did not work out as we had been promised, so what is next on the agenda. We cannot endure any ■ore mistakes. We have not had an advance opportunity to review the staff report prior to this hearing and fro■ glancing through the report at this time, it appears non of the real issues of economic fears have been answered. The report brings up additional questions. Does the recommendation to allow Sunday work mean the ordinance will be changed to allow Sunday work for all contractors or just as a special clause for this developer. And the issue of what will happen if these hoses are not completed within a given time frame. We have people in our neighborhood who have religious and family gatherings and work in their surrounding area would offend their Sunday. There are many issues that people have asked me to speak on that there is not enough time to address in this session. The issue of "us" people not wanting "those people" in. That has never been an issue. That issue was only brought up by city and housing coalition. We have •any ethnic backgrounds, economic levels and work status levels in our community. Most of us fit into the real• of what the guidelines are for qualifying, except we own a home. We do not have any visions of granduer about our community, as indicated by comments to us. We request that this project be postponed until a later date so that the real issues can be addressed. The only issues brought up in the staff recommendations and report are the side issues and not the issue at hand. Thank you very much for your time and patience. 22