Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-11MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2010 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Finerty convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Mayor Pro Tem Jim Ferguson Councilman Richard S. Kelly Councilman Robert A. Spiegel Mayor Cindy Finerty Also Present: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager/RDA Executive Director David J. Erwin, City Attorney Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Stephen Y. Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Bo Chen, City Engineer Russell Grance, Director of Building & Safety Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Janet M. Moore, Director of Housing Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works Frankie Riddle, Director of Special Programs Dorian Cooley, Division Chief, Palm Desert Fire/Riverside Co. Fire Dept./Cal Fire Andrew Shouse, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A (CLOSED SESSION ITEMS) None MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Reauest for Closed Session: Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant Section 54956.8: 1) Property: APN 628-130-015 Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Lauri Aylaian/City Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Property Owner: Barracuda, LLC Under Negotiation: x Price x 2) Property: APN 628-130-008 Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Lauri Aylaian/City Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Property Owner: David Nelson Under Negotiation: x Price x 3) Property: 72-375 Upper Way West (APN 638-1 Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Lauri Aylaian/City Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Property Owner: Janice Wood Under Negotiation: ) Price x to Govemment Code of Palm Desert/ Terms of Payment of Palm Desert/ Terms of Payment 30-027), Palm Desert of Palm Desert/ Terms of Payment 4) Property: 72559 - 72567 Highway 111, Palm Desert (APNs 640-370-015, 640-320-004) Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Justin McCarthy/City of Palm Desert/ Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Palm Springs Art Museum Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): a) PDCC Development LLC, Petition for Bankruptcy, United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 NOTE: THE FOLLOWING EXISTING LITIGATION ITEM WAS LISTED ON AN AGENDA ADDENDUM POSTED AT LEAST 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. b) Barry Wilk v. City of Palm Desert, et al., Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. RIC477765 Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 2 Upon a motion by Ferguson, second by Benson, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, Mayor Finerty adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:00 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 4:00 p.m. V. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION. None VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Councilman Richard S. Kelly VII. INVOCATION - Mayor Cindy Finerty VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B None IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. PRESENTATION TO HONOR RYAN STENDELL WITH THE CITY'S EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AWARD FOR JANUARY 2010. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Finerty presented a printed certificate to Mr. Stendell and congratulated him for always going above and beyond the call of duty no matter what the assignment, which was also recognized by a resident who sent a letter to the City further affirming this fact. X. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 28, 2010. Rec: Approve as presented. 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 155, 156, 164, and 165. Rec: Approve as presented. C. CULTURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES for the Meeting of November 24, 2009. Rec: Receive and file. D. REQUEST FOR DECLARATION of Surplus Property and Authorization for its Disposal — Inventory of Miscellaneous Art of Food & Wine Supplies. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Declare items listed on the accompanying staff report as surplus property; 2) authorize the donation of the surplus supplies to non-profit organizations as requests are received. E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Palm Desert "Statement of Investment Policy," As Amended (Joint Consideration with the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, Palm Desert Financing Authority, and Palm Desert Housing Authority). Rec: By Minute Motion, adopt the Palm Desert "Statement of Investment Policy," as amended. F. AUDITED Financial Reports for the City of Palm Desert - Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. Rec: By Minute Motion, receive and file the audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the City of Palm Desert for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. G. AUDITED Financial Reports for the Palm Desert Recreational Facilities Corporation - Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. Rec: By Minute Motion, receive and file the audited financial statements of the Palm Desert Recreational Facilities Corporation for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. H. INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT on Agreed -upon Procedures Performed on the Measure "A" Transportation Fund for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. Rec: By Minute Motion, receive and file the Independent Accountants' Report on Agreed -upon Procedures Performed on the Measure "A" Transportation Fund for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009. 4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 I. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Advertise and Call for Bids for Deconstruction of 44-887 San Antonio Circle, 44-870 San Antonio Circle, 44-850 San Antonio Circle, 44-845 San Clemente Circle, and 44-889 San Clemente Circle — All Associated with the Alessandro Alley Improvement Project (Contract No. C29570) (Joint Consideration with the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to advertise and call for sealed bids for deconstruction of 44-887 San Antonio Circle, 44-850 San Antonio Circle, 44-845 San Clemente Circle, and 44-889 San Clemente Circle, and for 44-870 San Antonio Circle — all associated with the Alessandro Alley Improvement Project. J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Purchase Palm Desert Police Department Promotional Items Utilizing CalCOPS Funding in an Amount Not to Exceed $4,600. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the purchase of Palm Desert Police Department promotional items utilizing CalCOPS funding in an amount not to exceed $4,600. K. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Maintenance Security for the Project Located at 74-124 Highway 111, Palm Desert (Larry Grotbeck Real Estate, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the release of Maintenance Security for the project located at 74-124 Highway 111. Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Ferguson, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None At this point in the meeting, Mr. Erwin asked for the City Council's consideration of suspending the agenda in order to take up Section XVII - Public Hearings Item B - AC Massage - at this time. He added that he'd advised Mr. Vodnoy, attorney for the Appellant in the matter, that he'd recommended to the City Council that it refer the matter to a hearing officer. Since Mr. Vodnoy is from Los Angeles, Mr. Erwin requested that the item be moved up on the agenda so that he could formally make such a recommendation for action. 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Ferguson, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the agenda was suspended in order to consider Public Hearing Item B at this time. (Please see that portion of these Minutes for the subsequent discussion and action.) XII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - 6 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 07-80 AS IT RELATES TO THE BUILDING AND SAFETY FEE SCHEDULE FOR POOL PUMP REPLACEMENT PERMITS. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2010-6. Motion was seconded by Kelly. Councilman Spiegel asked if the fee -free permit was approved, if that would result in a $250,000 lost in revenue. Mr. Grance responded the $250,000 amount was a cumulative total of all the fee -free permits the City currently offered. Further responding, he said the average cost for a pool pump permit was $241, and the number permits issued in the past was not tracked because there was no need, but all fee -free permits the City offered were now being tracked. Mayor Finerty called for the vote, and the motion carried by a 5-0 vote. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - 7- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY, AND ENACTING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Assistant Planner Missy Grisa stated the City hired a consultant in June 2008 to organize an Environmental Sustainability Plan and conduct a Greenhouse Gas Inventory. The consultant began a community outreach by evaluating the wider community under the six established categories of the Environmental Sustainability Plan. The following are the six resource areas: 1) "The Built Environment," which covers policies and actions to address efficiency, environmental impacts of man-made improvements, and construction; 2) "Energy Management" will reestablish the City's goal to reduce overall peak electricity and gas demand/consumption by 30% in five years from the 2007 baseline year; 3) "Material Management" details upstream procurement policies and downstream management; 4) "Regional Air Quality" will identify local and regional measures to clear the air of particulate and PM 10, which will promote healthy air quality; 5) "Transportation" aims to increase mobility through identifying and promoting alternative means of transportation by reducing vehicle miles traveled and 6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 gasoline consumption; 6) "Water Management" references the declining levels of the aquifer that supplies the Coachella Valley and aims to reduce water consumption by 30% in five years from the 2010 baseline. When the consultant completed his community outreach, a Core Sustainability Team (CST) was established to review the extensive list of goals, actions, and policies recommended from each of the six community outreach resource groups. The Core Sustainability Team consisted of two Councilmembers, City Manager, department directors, City staff, and the consultant. The CST separated the list into realistic, achievable ideas, and created a plan the group unanimously approved and is presented here. The Sustainability Plan evolved partially from two laws that had become effective and commonly referred to AB 32 and SB 375. Assembly Bill 32 requires a cap on greenhouse gas levels to 1990 levels by 2020. Senate Bill 375 requires local planning to develop sustainable community strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and urban sprawl. The goal is to create attractive, walkable, sustainable communities, and revitalize existing communities. In addition, Resolution 07-78 was adopted in 2007 to reduce greenhouse gas levels by 7% below 1990 levels by 2020. The 2008 Greenhouse Gas Inventory was completed and staff realized this goal was unrealistic attached to the new resolution still aiming to reduce those greenhouse levels, but reestablishing a baseline of 2008. The implementation of the Plan will be occurring in three phases; Phase I will occur in the years 2010 and 2011, Phase II in the years 2012 through2015, and Phase III in the years 2016 through 2020. Phase I will implement low- to no -cost measures given the current economy. Staff will absorb responsibility for implementation of the Plan at this time, meaning no new staff will be hired, but one staff member will be identified as a Sustainability Coordinator. If the proposed Resolution is passed, the Consultant will need to make the appropriate language modifications to the Greenhouse Gas Inventory to reflect the change of the Resolution. Staff recommended approval of the proposed Resolution. Councilman Spiegel asked in what phase will the $550,000 to $3,830,000 amounts be spent. Ms. Grisa responded it would be spent in Phase I, year's 2010 and 2010, but the amount depended on which measures were promoted and actions the Council wished to move forward with, but staff was aiming at the lower end of cost. Councilman Spiegel asked if Council approved staff's recommendation, when will the $3 million amount be spent. Ms. Grisa deferred the question to the consultant. MR. TED FLANNIGAN, Consultant with EcoMotion, stated the cost was estimated for the top 20 measures that were the low cost to no -cost 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 measures. There is a range of costs to the City to implement the measures from a low cost to a higher cost depending on how much can be done internally. The intent is to do the top 20 measures in the next two years to reduce greenhouse gas levels by 5.8% in the next two years, which would get the City on track to reduce its greenhouse levels to 1990 by 2020. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2010-7. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. C. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - 8 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONSENT TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORT COMMUNITIES TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (BID). Councilmember Benson asked Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson to explain why he felt it was now worthwhile to participate in the Business Improvement District (BID). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated that some may have read in the newspaper that he felt there wasn't enough accountability at the Palm Springs Resorts Communities Convention and Visitors Authority (CVA). His concern for the past 18 months or however long the Council had been considering this issue, was that the CVA was compelling Palm Desert hotels to give money to a private body of people who had no oversight by the elected Joint Powers Authority (JPA) who are suppose to oversee how the money is spent. He spoke with Sam Crow the Legal Counsel for the CVA who deferred that question to Riverside County Counsel as they are the lead agency in collecting the Business Improvement District (BID) proceeds from all the valley hotels that qualify. After the last meeting with Mr. Crow, a memorandum was issued to Gary Christmas, Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the County Counsel's Office, opining that the Hospitality Industry and Business Council (HIBC) unquestionably utilized public funds when they took Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) funds and administered them. Because of that delegation of authority by the JPA, according to California Government Code 6505, they were to come under strict accountability of all funds by the JPA. The County Counsel also determined they are a local agency for the purposes of the Government Code and will have to follow the Brown Act, file Conflict of Interest Forms, and Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Form 700, which was the type of accountability he would expect from a public agency. He said 85% of Palm Desert hotels voluntarily participate in the BID, and he wanted to make sure the City's participation would be meaningful and not just a rubber stamp. So with the legal memorandum and his review of the law, he was comfortable with the legal accountability the legislature had the wisdom to put in place, which the County Counsel was 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 kind enough to clarify for him. So at this point, he would recommend joining the BID. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2010-8. Motion was seconded by Spiegel. Councilman Spiegel pointed out that had the Council approved this a year ago, it would have had $600,000 more in the City's General Fund because that's what the City paid the CVA, and the other cities in the Valley did not. Mayor Finerty called for the vote, and it carried by a 5-0 vote. XIII. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: None XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PERFORMING ARTS CONTRACT IN CONJUNCTION WITH PALM DESERT'S ANNUAL 2010 INDEPENDENCE DAY CELEBRATION (CONTRACT NO. C29580). Responding to question, Marketing Manager Kristy Kneiding said the City of Rancho Mirage was co -sponsoring the 2010 Independence Day Celebration, but not the City of Indian Wells. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the subject contract in the amount of $7,500 with Side Street Strutters, Corona, Califomia, to provide instrumental and vocal entertainment in conjunction with Palm Desert's Annual 2010 Independence Day Celebration; 2) authorize the Mayor to sign the contract as presented — funds will be advanced from the 2010-2011 Community Events Budget, Account No. 110-4416-414-3061. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF FIREWORKS DISPLAY CONTRACT FOR PALM DESERT'S ANNUAL 2010 INDEPENDENCE DAY CELEBRATION (CONTRACT NO. C29590). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the subject contract in the amount of $35,148 with Pyro-Spectaculars by Souza, Rialto, California, for professional staff and pyrotechnic supplies and services for Palm Desert's Annual 2010 Independence Day Celebration; 2) authorize the Mayor to sign the contract — funds will be advanced from the 2010-2011 Community Events Budget, Account No. 110-4416-414-3061. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. C. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN PROPOSAL "CANTAMAR" BY WOODS DAVY AS THE PUBLIC ART COMPONENT FOR SEGOVIA OF PALM DESERT, 39-905 VIA SCENA, PALM DESERT (Oakmont Senior Living LLC, Applicant). Responding to question, Public Arts Coordinator Deborah Schwartz said the Art In Public Places Commission unanimously approved the "Cantamar" design on January 27, 2010. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve proposed artwork "Cantamar" by Woods Davy as the public art component for Segovia of Palm Desert located at 39-905 Via Scena. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ONE ARTIST OR ARTIST TEAM TO CREATE PUBLIC ARTWORK FOR THE PALM DESERT AQUATICS CENTER AND AWARD CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $45,800 TO THE SELECTED ARTIST OR TEAM (CONTRACT NO. C29310). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Select one artist or artist team to create artwork for the Palm Desert Aquatics Center; 2) authorize the City Manager to make minor revisions to the subject contract, as recommended by the City Attomey, and the Mayor to execute same in the amount of $45,800 with selected artist or artist team — funds are available in Account No. 436-4650-454-3010. Motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated he thought the Council had to select one of the proposals first. Councilman Kelly asked for a description of each of the proposals. Public Arts Coordinator Deborah Schwartz stated the proposal that ranked first is by Deanna Sirlin, which is called "Cool River," a mosaic that surrounds the zero -depth entry pool. The second ranked proposal was by artist Paul Hobson who created images from the Diving and Swimming Manual that coaches used to use; the design included graphic images of swimmers 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 and divers and separated by lane lines. The third ranked proposal is by team Jim Hirschfield and Sonya Ishii, and their design includes three circular areas that represent floating water. All artists will be using materials that are sustainable for a pool and safe in a pool environment. Responding to question, she said the Art In Public Places Commission (AIPP) did not make a selection, but they did rank the proposals. Mayor Finerty asked what area would the art work cover. Ms. Schwartz said all proposals were for the area outside the entry to the zero -depth pool. Originally, consideration was for the entry area to the pool and the bottom of the pool, but due to County health codes, the bottom of the pool area had to be eliminated. Councilman Kelly stated he liked Proposal No. 2, the one with the divers and swimmers because it will draw a lot of attention. He liked the other two proposals, but thought people will walk by them and not notice them. Mayor Finerty stated she liked Proposal No. 2 as well. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Select Proposal No. 2 by Paul Hobson to create artwork for the Palm Desert Aquatics Center; 2) authorize the City Manager to make minor revisions to the subject contract, as recommended by the City Attorney, and the Mayor to execute same in the amount of $45,800 with selected artist — funds are available in Account No. 436-4650-454-3010. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. ORDINANCE NO. 1205 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, REVISING CHAPTER 15.02 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE RELATING TO SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES AND SAFETY DEVICES (Continued from the meeting of January 28, 2010). Mr. Grance stated the proposed Ordinance affects Pool Safety Act of 2006, which was a near image of Assembly Bill 2977 (AB 2977). He provided a PowerPoint presentation on pool safety. He said in July 1997, Assembly Bill 3305 (AB 3305) required five safety measures, which can be found in the 2001 Edition of the California Building Code. At that time, one only of the following measures had to be picked: One could have a 60-inch higher barrier around the pool or of the property, pool safety cover, exit alarms, self -closing or self -latching on all the doors providing access to the pool, or other means of protection deemed equal to the other four options. In 2007, AB 2977 came, and the difference between AB 3305 and AB 2977 was the 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 addition of two safety measures for a total of seven options. At the local level, back in 1996, the City adopted Ordinance 821, which required a 48-inch high barrier that completely surrounded the pool and separating it from the dwelling. Knowing that dwelling could be part of the barrier, the City's Ordinance required one of the four safety features in addition to the barrier. There was an exception at that time for privately patrolled and guarded communities where a barrier was not required, but you had to have one of the four safety measures. In December 2002 the City passed Ordinance 1024, which revised the prior ordinance and upgraded the barrier requirement from 48-inch to 60-inch high, and it had to be around the pool and separating it from the dwelling. Again, if the dwelling was part of that separation, one of the four safety measures was also required. The City also had an exception with this Ordinance, and changed the language from "gated" to "guarded" or "privately patrolled" to "golf communities." He said golf communities could be unguarded and ungated community. Currently, State law requires one of seven safety features to be installed as AB 2977 dictates. Staff found a flaw in that law, in that you are only required to select one of the safety features. In a situation where there was a dwelling in a community that had no barrier, all one had to do was install an exit alarm on all doors providing direct access to that pool, but wouldn't provide any safety for anyone wondering onto that property. He said staff had concerns with some of the added safety features. Staff was recommending modifying the current California Building Code, Section 3109 to include the barrier requirement, removal mesh fencing, pool safety cover, and eliminate three measures that didn't provide the level of safety for children. He displayed an example of a typical pool installation in a single-family development where anyone can wonder into the property and gain access to the pool. Currently, the law states you can have exit alarms on all doors providing direct access to the pool, which may provide a certain level of protection for those living or visiting that dwelling, but provides no protection for someone wondering onto that property. The same would be for the self -closing and self -latching devices. The pool alarm is a new feature, but it may not be heard over the television or radio, and if no one is home, it provides no protection to someone wondering on the property. Staff believes the three measures just mentioned were not adequate safety measures. Instead staff recommends the following four safety measures: 1) pool safety covers, because it would protect children, visitors, or anyone who may wonder onto the property; 2) removal isolation fencing; 3) barrier fencing at property line with installation of alarms at all exit doors that provide direct access to the pool; and 4) any other means of protection that is deemed equivalent to the other three safety measures. Staff was trying to create a safe environment for children whether they lived on the property or neighborhood to prevent drowning. He displayed a classic example of a recently installed pool in the City of Palm Desert that abuts a golf cart path with no barrier where someone who was walking alongside could potentially fall into the pool. In this particular case, the property owner chose to install exit alarms on all the doors providing 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 direct access to the pool, but it's not a good safety measure for children. He said if this Ordinance was approved, the regulations will apply to new and remodeled pools/spas built after the effective date of the Ordinance, and all existing pools and spas will be deemed legal and conforming. When installing new pool pumps, heaters, filters, or re -plastering to existing pools/spas, it would not trigger these new safety requirements. However, when altering the structure of the pool/spa as part of an alteration, it will trigger the new safety requirements. As a final note, the International Code Council (ICC) who is the author of all codes the City enforces and used nationwide, felt this was an important avenue to review to create a national set of safety standards. The board of directors voted to have the first all -encompassing comprehensive swimming pool code. This action is designed to provide coordinated codes with other international codes that will meet the requirement of the Virginia Graeme Baker Act and upgrade the safety. On a high note, on February 5, the City received confirmation from the International Code Council that Mr. Jason Finley, one of the City's Building Inspectors had been appointed to this very important committee, and they will be drafting the first National Pool Safety Standard that will be used nationwide. The proposed Ordinance was thoroughly vetted and received unanimous support from the Public Safety Commission, Fire Department, and Business Industry Association (BIA). Responding to question, he said change of ownership would not trigger compliance with the law and only a new building permit would trigger this requirement if altering the structure shell. He said it would be the same as if you owned a home that was built under the 1985 California Uniform Building Code and changed ownership under the 2007 California Uniform Building Code; the building would be deemed legal and conforming even though it may not meet today's standards. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated the City had a large pond with a steep bank at the Civic Center Park with more than 100,000 children that played on the equipment each year, and it had no safety features. He went on to say The River had a huge lake with no barriers, but responsible parents seemed to be able to watch their children. He asked what where the facts or the epidemic of children drowning in Palm Desert that staff was trying to combat. Mr. Grance stated the staff report provided information from the Riverside County Department of Health with statistics on the Coachella Valley, which indicated that 15% of the population was from Palm Desert. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated that as a side note, when staff stated it cared about child safety, it sounded like those who had concerns with the requirements didn't care about child safety, which couldn't be furtherfrom the truth. 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Mr. Grance responded he didn't mean to imply that, but the current law had digressed in pool safety for children by providing safety features that didn't provide an effective barrier for someone who wondered onto a property with a pool. Further responding, he said the proposed Ordinance applied wherever a pool was built in the City, and if one of the four proposed safety mechanisms was used, one would be allowed to have a pool. Councilman Kelly asked what prompted staff to do something about this matter. Mr. Grance responded that when AB 2977 came in, staff felt the law digressed in pool safety for children. Staff also received a complaint from an individual who lived in Palm Desert County Club that brought a specific pool installation to the City's attention. Staff then followed up by trying to strengthen pool safety for children. Councilman Kelly stated he thought there was already an Ordinance that required a wall or fence, because he recalled a similar issue where he had concerns about the height of the fence. Mr. Grance stated Ordinance 1024 was invalidated when the City adopted the 2007 California Uniform Building Code. Further responding, he said in January 2008 the City adopted the 2007 Code that included the new assembly bill and eliminated Ordinance 1024, which required the barrier or a fence. Councilman Kelly stated he didn't realize the adoption of the 2007 Building Code eliminated the fence requirement. Ms. Aylaian called attention to the fact that the City currently had a requirement for a fence in the Residential R-1 Zone. Councilman Kelly asked when the pool at Palm Desert Country Club was put in, if it required a wall under the City's Ordinance. Mr. Grance stated the property owner was required to have a fence as part of the zoning requirement for the conditions of approval for that project; however, the pool was installed after the project was built and under the new Code. Therefore, under the new code it complied with only the installation of the exit alarms. Councilman Spiegel asked if other cities in the Valley had this Ordinance. Mr. Grance responded that neighboring cities had adopted the same Building Code as mandated by the State, and it included Chapter 31, which required that everyone comply with the seven safety measures. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Councilman Kelly asked if the 2007 Building Code required property owners to install a fence around the pool. Mr. Grance replied it did not. Councilman Spiegel commented that Palm Desert would be the first City in the Valley to put this Draconian requirement for pools. Mr. Grance said the current Code did give the options of a safety cover, removal mesh fencing, and other safety measures that can be used, but they are not mandatory. He said the current Code provided a menu list of seven optional safety measures, but staff was proposing to reduce the list by three. Councilman Kelly stated a pool cover didn't make sense, because a pool cover had to be taken off in order to swim in the pool. He couldn't recall the last time he saw a pool with a cover on it, especially in Palm Desert. Responding to question, Mr. Grance said the seven measures were listed on page two of the staff report, but staff was proposing to eliminate the exit alarms, self -closing, self -latching doors, swimming pool alarms, and instead offer four options that would provide adequate pool safety for children. Councilmember Benson stated property owners with a safety cover on their pool wouldn't need to have a fence around the pool. Mr. Grance said that was correct. He said under the proposed Ordinance property owners would only have to pick from one of the four safety measures. He said if property owners want to maintain their views, they can opt to have a pool cover and it's encumbered upon the homeowner to maintain it like anything else. He said the proposed Ordinance was not meant to circumvent supervision, but everyone knew supervision on occasion had failed. Councilmember Benson stated the proposed Ordinance didn't require current property owners with a pool to install a fence around it. Mr. Grance agreed, stating they would all be legal and non -conforming. The only thing that would trigger a property owner to comply with the proposed Ordinance is if they made alterations to the structure shell. Councilman Spiegel asked if the BIA reviewed the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Grance answered yes, stating the BIA, the Fire Department, and Public Safety Commission supported the Ordinance. 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Councilman Kelly stated he understood the seven measures and how property owners were only required to select only one of the measures in order to comply, which he didn't see how that would provide protection. However, he was not exactly sure what staff was proposing. Mr. Grance stated staff was proposing to modify current State law by only providing four options and eliminating items 4, 5, and 6 listed on page 2 of the staff report. Councilman Kelly stated he had a wall around the back of his yard, and if he did something to trigger him to comply with the proposed Ordinance, would he have to install a fence between the pool and the back doors. Mr. Grance stated that if the property line barrier was 60-inch, any doors opening from the dwelling and direct access to the pool would require the installation of alarms, which was a component of item number 1 as written in the actual Code language. Councilman Kelly asked if he triggered something to make him comply, would he be required to install alarms even if he didn't have young children. Mr. Grance answered yes. Mayor Finerty inquired about the statistics. Mr. Grance stated that for the Coachella Valley in the year 2007 there were 19 drowning/near drowning incidents, and of the 19 incidents, there were three fatalities. In 2009 there were 22 drowning/near drowning incidents, and of the 22 incidents, there were five fatalities. Councilman Kelly asked if he triggered something to make him comply, if he would be required to put a pool cover. Mr. Grance stated one of the four safety measures would need to be selected, and it depended on the site condition. Further responding, he confirmed, Item 7 - Other Means of Protection was one of the four options, but that option would need to be equal to the other three measures proposed, which would be reviewed and approved on a case by case basis. He said the proposed Ordinance is meant to give flexibility for those who wished to retain their views, stating he understood views were paramount. He said if a property owner chose not to have a fence around its property, it can choose to install a removal mesh fencing around the pool, pool cover, or other means of protection. He reiterated that all of these safety measures were another level of protection, but supervision was number one. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 MR. GORDON STEIN, San Juan Avenue, Palm Desert, CA, stated he was raised here in Palm Desert, had four children, and four grandchildren, so he definitely had an affection for children and cared about their safety. He said the chart on page 5 of the staff report indicated that in the year 2009 there were nine incidents in pools with a barrier, but it was equal to the nine incidents without a barrier, which might suggest that even though these barriers might be in place, they still may not necessarily be fully effective. He said that obviously attention and supervision of children were primary. He agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson's comment that to require a property owner to fence a home at a golf course where it may have bodies of water or lake, one may still have an incident with the unfenced body of water. He said there were other potential hazards in the City that were not being addressed, which would be an unfair application or Band-Aid on a problem. He felt the existing seven points in the Code were adequate, and anything beyond what the City currently had or needed would be going into a Draconian state. He said if the City thought there was such a high incident count, the City should lead by example and do something about those bodies of water within City owned properties and provide safety training programs to raise awareness or provide training for infants to leam how to swim. MS. LESLIE MILLER, Bel Air Road, stated the City should consider whether all bodies of water within privates clubs weren't just as dangerous. She said adoption of the proposed Ordinance without further study would be Draconian, because there was no proven relationship between the incident and no fencing as opposed to an incident with fencing, and without it there was no need to change the existing regulations. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted Carol Benford who resides on Tennessee Avenue submitted a letter to the Council that stated, "The reason children fell into swimming pools was due to lack of parental or adult supervision. This danger cannot be completely eliminated because there was always the human element. If the City really wanted to take care of this issue, in a forever sort of way, it should pass a law that prohibited new pools and existing ones must be filled in. Although it sounded ridiculous, it seemed it was the direction this issue was taking, and she hoped the City Council will use its common sense." He said the data on page 5 illustrated to him that just as many people go in swimming pools and drown with barriers as without them. Additionally, the data showed eight fatalities in three years in a Valley of 400,000 people, which was 1.2 million swimmers over a three-year period, yet staff wanted to impose thousands of dollars of improvements on every single new home constructed in a down market because of an insignificant number. He didn't mean to belittle people who had lost a child through drowning, which was a horrible thing to happen, but the numbers showed there were far more deaths by easier means of resolution than going after these eight fatalities. He believed this matter required more study, and if the City already had a staff member on a national committee to evaluate national 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 standards, he would like to wait and see what they are. He didn't like second guessing legislatures, particularly having updated State law three years ago, but he greed with Councilman Kelly that he didn't see what the rush was to go out and pass something when the impact was unknown. He agreed with Councilman Spiegel that Draconian was the best adjective for the proposed Ordinance. Councilman Kelly commented that a fence couldn't be put around the ocean. Responding to question, Mayor Finerty suggested the motion could be to deny staffs recommendation and go with the current State Code, keep the seven safety measures as they exist now, and not eliminate the three measures recommended by staff. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson added the motion should include directing the City Manager to inform Building and Safety that it had a Planning requirement to put fences around pools. Mayor Finerty and Councilman Spiegel concurred. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) DENY the staff recommendation and retain the current regulations for swimming pool enclosures and safety devices; 2) direct City Manager to inform the Building & Safety Department that there is a Planning requirement for fences around swimming pools. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. Councilman Kelly stated the Council thanked staff for their concern. XVI. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 8.40 - RECREATIONAL VEHICLES (RVs) ON PRIVATE PROPERTY - OF TITLE 8 - HEALTH AND SAFETY - OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, CLARIFYING STANDARDS FOR SCREENING RVs PARKED ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES. Assistant Planner Missy Grisa stated the Recreational Vehicle (RV) Ordinance amendments were initially brought up by a resident suggestion to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and ultimately it recommended to the City Council to make those modifications due to vague language resulting in varying results. Staff was tasked with researching adjacent city's codes and formed a RV Subcommittee. After several renditions of proposed modifications after community, City staff, ARC, and City Council feedback, staff proposed new language to include: the elimination of front yard RV parking; RV on a street side yard must be moved to a location behind the side facade of the residence; eliminate setback dimensions from the property 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 line; necessitating 100% screening at the time of storage; temporary parking was now restricted to a 24-hour period for loading, unloading, cleaning and charging a RV; emergency egress and ingress from residences to remain at three feet; a change in noticing requirements; staff approvals versus ARC approvals; and allowance for a strict exception process. Lawful non -conforming uses will be made to comply or removed upon transfer of ownership. Current street side yard locations will be given a 12-month amortization period to find other means of storage. Since the writing of this Ordinance, staff had received two e-mails and two letters, and three of those letters had concerns about the 24-hour period for loading and unloading, stating if was not sufficient time. Additionally, staff recommended an Application Fee of $168. Currently, there is no fee required, but staff had been spending an average of four hours on each of these cases. Staff recommended approval of the proposed modifications to the RV Ordinance as presented. She offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel asked how much time did those that complained about the 24-hour period felt they needed. Ms. Grisa responded they favored the existing 72-hour period. She did address their comments by informing them the City still allowed temporary parking that was aimed primarily at visitors who want to park their RV at someone's home for 72 hours, but it required a temporary permit issued by Code Compliance. However, it's considered a nuisance for them to come to City Hall and obtain a permit to load and unload as stated in their e-mail. She went on to say the 24-hour period for loading and unloading never came up as an issue in the subcommittee meetings as not being enough time; the concern was raised after the Ordinance was written. MS. SUZANNE PRIDE, Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, CA, stated she originally came to the City because she received a letter in the mail when Mr. Smith was seeking approval for his large bus -size RV. She attended the meeting where Riverside County Fire Chief Cooley was present and stated that large bus -size RVs were extreme fire hazards, because they are like mobile homes and fire moved through them quickly. Quoting from the December 10 Minutes, she said Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated a neighbor's life becomes paramount concern because of the ability and configuration of a RV to catch fire. However, at the next City Council meeting of January 14, 2010, Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson spoke nothing of safety, but instead stated, "It seemed that this neighbor almost created this problem and now wants the Applicant to solve it." She asked the City Council to help its residents understand the difference in one month's time from having safety be paramount one month and punishing a resident the following month for having the house windows face a huge bus. She went on to say she found out that Mr. Smith's RV had been parked for four years without a permit and was now grandfathered in and allowed to keep his RV. 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 On October 8, 2009, Mr. Smith stated the City did not allow him to have this large bus -size RV on Willow Street where he once lived, but never obtained a permit when he moved to Iron Street. She questioned whether the City ever informed Mr. Smith he needed a permit when he was on Willow Street, because if he was told he couldn't have a RV on one street, why was he allowed to park it on Iron Street without a permit. Additionally, at the same meeting, Mr. Erwin stated Mr. Smith's RV would be grandfathered because there were no complaints, which she begged to differ. Once again, she felt the City was looking for a simple solution, but there weren't any. She displayed a photograph that partially exposed the RV, stating Councilman Kelly believed it was beautifully screened, but she disagreed. She reiterated Mr. Smith's RV had been parked for four years without a permit and was now grandfathered in, and on the other hand, the neighbor who was building the house was being punished because she could have built her garage on the other side. If the neighbor opted to place the garage next to the RV, then it would have created a larger fire hazard because of the gasoline of the two vehicles next to each other. She couldn't see how the City Council would even conceive approving the proposed Ordinance. She noted Councilman Spiegel had stated that if this issue was taken to a vote where only 5% of the residents were RV owners, RV owners would lose. She said it was time to take this matter to a vote and gather the necessary signatures or petitions and allow the citizens of Palm Desert to vote. MS. SUZANNE CARNEY, Fairway Lane, Palm Desert, CA, stated she was building a house on Iron Street and had been before the City Council previously to express her concerns about the RV Ordinance and proposed revisions. She also participated as a community member on the subcommittee charged with drafting and presenting changes to the City Council, and the adverse impact of a large RV next to the property line was not being addressed. She still had two main concerns, one was the potential for large fire loads with modern RVs of bus size proportions. The other was the visual impact of a RV that is twice the height of a six-foot side wall, because that visual impact would be constantly present for the neighbor next to a large RV. The focus of the committee was to make the permitting process Tess subjective for City staff reviewing a request, but the process of enforcing the Code was not addressed. She displayed photographs taken of the neighbor's RV prior to permitting and after four weeks, stating there was absolutely no change. She said the screening and the moving of the RV away from the wall was not done. She said various committee members stated they would not want a RV next to them, but because it's not next to their home, it didn't matter. She said the majority of the residents in Palm Desert do not own a RV, and the City needed an Ordinance that didn't allow such placement of RVs so that neighbors are adversely impacted. The Ordinance could contain setbacks and/or height restrictions to make permitting less subjective, decrease health and safety issues, and decrease 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 visual impact, which would make enforcement easier to accomplish. She thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak to the Council. MR. GENE POE, Buena Circle, Palm Desert, CA, stated he's lived in Palm Desert 45 years and couldn't understand why this issue had to be hatched and re -hatched. He noted RVs were not allowed to be plugged in and everything had to be turned off on them, so he couldn't see how a RV could be any worse than a car. He questioned whether RVs will be outlawed completely even though one had lived in Palm Desert for years with one. The City received one or two complaints and caused the City to go through a whole process. However, he liked what the City was proposing and thought the Council did a good job; it was a good compromise. He said there are a few complaints, but it's the same complainer who knew that a RV existed prior to moving next door to it. He was in favor of approving the proposed Ordinance as presented. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, Palm Desert, CA, stated he appreciated the Council reviewing this issue. He said this matter started with addressing RVs parked in front yards and that matter for the most part had been fixed. He felt 90% of the people followed the rules and regulations, but Code Enforcement was stuck with the 10% that didn't and ended up looking like blight. He said it was important the Ordinance was fair to everyone in the City and not just one certain area. He recalled Chief Cooley making the comment about the fact that by Building Code a three-foot setback was required, but regarding buildings, the setback needed to be further back because RVs were highly combustible. He said the size of the lots and what type of RV would fit on a lot was not addressed at any of the meetings. He said there are very small size lots that bus -size RVs just wouldn't fit, and in the future, there was the potential of having a bus -size RV parked on the side of a house of a 6,000 square -foot lot, which concerned him. He said anything more than 10,000 square -feet would be susceptible to having a large RV, and since the setbacks had been taken away, a 12-foot RV parked behind a six-foot gate would still have six feet sticking out over the top of the gate. The Ordinance states there is no screening on the gates, so one can have a large RV in front of the gate and still see it from the street. With regard to the grandfather issue, the Ordinance mentions not grandfathering RVs that are parked in the front yard or side street, which he suggested the City should expand to include all RVs and instead require everyone with a RV to obtain a permit and have them reviewed on a case by case basis. He said this matter had been reviewed for eight months, so the 12-month time frame could be shortened to six -months to make those RVs parked in the front yard to become conforming. Lastly, he was in favor of the 24-hour period to load and unload a RV. Councilman Spiegel stated he would like to hear from the two Councilmembers that were on the RV Subcommittee. 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Councilman Kelly stated he was one of the Councilmembers on the subcommittee that spent a lot of time discussing this matter. He believed what was being proposed was too strict, but on the other hand, after the hard work and compromises reached by the Committee, it was a good Ordinance considering all the problems it faced. He felt the proposed Ordinance protected the rights of the property owners, property owners with a RV, and the rest of the citizens. The only area he questioned was the 24-hour period for loading and unloading, because the City encouraged people with RV to use a storage facility, and providing a 24-hour period would be more of an inducement to use a storage facility and still have enough time to load and unload. Having been a RV owner 10 years ago, he knew it would be difficult to get the refrigerator cooling and everything done in the 24-hour period. He pointed out that when a RV was on blocks, it didn't mean it would be there for weeks, because RVs have a refrigerator that had to be leveled before it can be turned on to cool it off, which was a requirement. He was in favor of the proposed Ordinance with the exception of providing more time to load and unload a RV. Mayor Finerty stated she sat on all the meetings, and she was still concerned over the safety issue raised by Chief Cooley. She believed the most important task of government was public safety. She was also concerned with the visual impact, because the sizes of RVs were getting bigger and bigger. She personally would like to have them all in a storage facility, and it would be in the best interest of the City. She agreed that if this issue was put to a vote, the majority will vote for permanent storage facilities. The Committee did work on this matter for a long time as Councilman Kelly mentioned, and it had been a lingering issue for more than 25 years, so it will probably never have an ordinance that will please everyone. She would be voting against the proposed Ordinance based on safety and Chief Cooley's comment, because it seemed logical to her that if you couldn't put a building that close to another building, why a RV with combustible fluid would be allowed. Councilmember Benson stated she thought RVs were supposed to be fully screened, but it was never going to happen. She agreed modern RVs will only get bigger and bigger and people buy them before they obtain a permit to park them by their house. She said other cities had outlawed them and didn't know why Palm Desert had kept fighting this issue for 25 years. She said RVs keep getting bigger and bigger, but they are being parked in smaller and smaller lots, so nothing had improved. She said if people want a RV, it should put in a storage facility. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted he sat on one of the subcommittee meetings, and it was always trying to strike a balance of fairness between property owners and RV owners. What's interesting is that he heard Chief Cooley's comments completely differently, particularly the reason why you 22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 don't consider a RV a building, because you can't drive a building, but you can drive a RV away and open up the fire lane. The testimony offered about meeting the fire lane was just for one side of the house and not both. Additionally, the testimony that should the neighbors in question catch on fire, the fire would most likely be suppressed from Mr. Smith's back yard because there wouldn't be room to get by the neighbor's house, so he was satisfied with that answer. The other issue about aesthetics, which he mentioned was not relevant, but couldn't help but notice that most of the windows faced directly on this RV that had been there for three years. He said the neighbor was building a beautiful home, which was gorgeous, but one of the two neighbors had the remedy to do some tasteful landscaping, perhaps on both sides of the wall, and this whole issue would go away. He also wondered what the neighbor would see if the RV was moved, which would probably be brick and marginally more attractive. However, he didn't want to craft a citywide ordinance around one RV, which was what was happening for the last three meetings. He said the other RV owners the Council heard from had been reasonable and sensible. The Council started down this trail with front yard RV parking and slowly got into side yards. In general, the Council was happy with people that did side yard parking with minimal screening, but then the Ordinance went with more stringent standards, which he agreed with. He also agreed with the comment made about the lot size observation, which will require staff to just say no to lots that are too small. He went by Councilman Kelly's old house where he used to keep his RV and it was more than 100 feet long and some 70 feet deep that three RVs could be parked there and would never be seen from the street. So he didn't understand why a one acre property owner should be denied or that the City should place a blanket band just because some 8,000 square -foot property owners are illegally wedging their RVs into their side yards. He said staff just needed to get a stiffer back bone to saying no to some of the cases that are not appropriate, but diligently making sure that the appropriate ones are landscaped. He said the proposed Ordinance may not be perfect, but it included input from all the stakeholders and it was a product of a democratic process. If there is a problem with the 24-hour period requirement, the Council can go back and tinker with the Ordinance. He said what was being proposed was a good workable draft Ordinance, which he will support. Councilman Spiegel concurred. He said Code Compliance can be more diligent when it came to RVs, because there were some that stuck out like a sore thumb and get away with it. He agreed with the comment made that a car was just as combustible as a RV, because that was true. He didn't believe that RVs should be eliminated just because a large percentage of people didn't want them, because it would be like eliminating all pools, which will never happen. 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1207 to second reading, approving amended standards to Chapter 8.40 - Recreational Vehicles (RVs) on Private Property - of Title 8 - Health and Safety - of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, with staff directed to look at the 24-hour temporary parking issue as the regulation goes forward. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 3-2 vote, with Benson and Finerty voting NO. B. INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON COMPLETION OF THE MID -VALLEY BIKE PATH ALIGNMENT STUDY. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the informational report. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ORDINANCE NO. 1202 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 15.06 - "ENERGY CODE" TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, AND REPEALING TITLE 24, SECTION 24.30 THEREOF. Mr. Grance stated the proposed Ordinance will formally adopt the 2008 California Energy Code. Responding to question, he didn't believe any City Ordinance would be invalidated by its adoption. Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony on this matter. With no public testimony offered, she declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1202 as presented. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. B. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY THE CITY MANAGER AND PERMIT ADMINISTRATOR, REVOKING A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT PERMIT FOR AC MASSAGE - SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 72-855 FRED WARING DRIVE, SUITE C-16 Massage Establishment Permit No. 08-46021 (Lawrence Andrews, Appellant). Mr. Erwin stated this was an appeal of a massage establishment permit license. His recommendation to the Council was to refer the matter to a hearing officer to be selected between the City Manager and himself, after which, notice will be given to the Applicant and Mr. Vodnoy so that they may appear and be heard. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, directed that the Appeal be referred to a Hearing Officer to be selected and appointed jointly by the City Manager and City Attorney. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 XVIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1. 45th District Conaresswoman Mary Bono Mack — Mr. Wohlmuth reported that he was contacted this week by Congresswoman Bono Mack's Office, asking the City to discuss its appropriation priority requests for the coming Federal budget year with her staff. He had directed staff to send out a note to all Department Heads for this information. However, since there hadn't yet been a formal request before the City Council, he would be forwarding what the Departments provide and Council would be able to comment thereon or provide any other direction regarding the highest priority. In response to Councilman Kelly's request to be sure that the Portola/I-10 Interchange is a high priority on the City's list, Mr. Wohlmuth said it was already there. B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. CITY CLERK 1. Consideration of the Appointment of a City Council Delegate and Alternate to Participate in the Southern Califomia Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly, May 5-7, 2010, in La Quinta, California. Ms. Klassen stated that if Council wished to send a delegate and designate an alternate to the Southern Califomia Association of Governments, Council action would be required. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Councilman Richard S. Kelly as the official delegate to the SCAG General Assembly, May 5-7, 2010, with Councilman Robert A. Spiegel as the Altemate. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 D. PUBLIC SAFETY o Fire Department None o Police Department None E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Riverside County Transportation Commission Appointment — Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said that when the Council went through its liaison appointments some time ago, the issue of RCTC came up. He noted that they have two meetings/month in Riverside — the first is Plans & Programs Committees, the other is the General Commission Meeting. Previously, then - Commissioner Kelly had requested that the Coachella Valley Plans & Programs Committee be held locally, because it really just involved Coachella Valley projects and business, but he was tumed down. Councilman Kelly then stepped down from RCTC. When he was appointed, Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson asked the City Manager to again raise the issue of holding the Coachella Valley Plans & Programs Committee meeting locally, and RCTC Executive Director Anne Mayerwas more receptive and granted the request. In Tight of that, he'd asked Councilman Kelly if he would be willing to go back on the Commission to share his vast experience there on the City's behalf. Additionally, the Plans & Programs Committee meets right after the CVAG Transportation Committee, which Councilman Kelly chairs. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said he would then be willing to serve as the City's Alternate to RCTC. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Councilman Richard S. Kelly as the City of Palm Desert's representative to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and Mayor Pro Tem Jim Ferguson as the Altemate. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by 5-0 vote. 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 o City Council Consideration of Travel Reauests and Reports: None o City Council Committee Reports: 1. Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce — Councilman Spiegel said that the Chamber President/CEO Barbara deBoom is putting together a Friday Luncheon Get-together. She's organizing Chamber -member restaurants for this event, with a different one to be visited each Friday, no discounts will be given. It was just to get people out to these restaurants to have lunch; the proprietors are being asked to prepare for as many as 40-50 participants, and that they'll have to work with separate checks. He felt it was an exciting way to help the City's businesses, with plans to initiate the program in March. He would let his colleagues know the restaurants selected each week and hoped they would be able to participate when they have the time. o City Council Comments: 1. Councilman Spiegel reported that during Fashion Week on Monday, March 29, the first 300 women who purchase tickets can then go and vote for their favorite Valentine — the event is now looking for 12 bachelors — with all the proceeds to benefit Shelter From the Storm. He said they anticipate raising about $50,000. XIX. ADJOURNMENT With City Council concurrence, Mayor Finerty adjourned the meeting at 5:41 p.m. r INDY FTY, MAY ATTEST: CHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK 'Th CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 27