HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-06-12MINUTES
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
June 12, 1975
I CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency was
called to order at 8:35 P.M., on June 12, 1975, by Chairman
Henry B. Clark.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Chuck Aston
Jean Benson
Noel Brush
Jim McPherson
Chairman Henry B. Clark
Others Present:
Harvey L. hurlburt, Executive Director
Dave Erwin, City Attorney
Paul Williams, Director/Environmental Services
IZI. NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Clark advised that the hearing was a culmination
of many months of study by staff consultants. The Agency originated
when Council requested that study be undertaken of the commercial
area of the City and asked that staff/consultants come up with a
precise area where the City had problems, such as inadequate parking
and frontage road problems. In August, 1974, Council created the
Redevelopment Agency. Since hat time the project area was selected
and the redevelopment area was prepared. A 20 member Project Area
Committee headed by George Minturn, solicited input from concerned
people within the area. The Committee has since spent many hours
going over the Plan, which Chairman Clark stated is a good one that
will improve on what we have to make the project a good one for
many years to come. He also stated that parking is one of the
major reasons for establishing the Redevelopment Are&.
Mr. Hurlburt gave an indepth summary of the Redevelopment
Plan, which highlighted flooding problems due to an inadequate
drainage system; mixture of commercial and residential uses along
Alessandro which are not properly buffered from one another; an
inadequate supply of parking facilities; congestion and accidents
resulting from the existing traffic pattern on Highway 111 frontage
road. Mr. Hurlburt stated that these are the reasons for utilizing
redevelopment. He also indicated that utilization of the Redevelop-
ment Program in the City of Palm Desert was to obtain financing
for the resolution of these problems.
Paul Williams went into detail and discussed the responses
received on the EIR and the responses received on the Redevelopment
Plan, after solicitation of comment by staff, as follows:
The Environmental Services Department advised that
archaeological research has indicated that the edges
of the Valley have a relatively high archaeologic
sensitivity and that the Project Area may contain some
unknown archaeologic evidence which may be encountered
during development within the Project Area.
In response to the justification request from the
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS regarding not designating the
extreme eastern portion of the Project Area for
June 12, 1975 Page 1
Planned Commercial/Resortdevelopment, staff advised
that the proposed land use mixture within the Project
Area was based upon extensive economic analysis of the
area, and that it is believed that economic demands do
not warrant additional commercial resort development
at the eastern extreme of the Project Area.
CITY OF RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL MUSEUM requested identific-
ation of the person and/or organization which conducted
the archaeologic study. Staff advised that the
Archaeological Research Unit, Dry Lands Research
Institute of the University of California, Riverside,
conducted the search of the Palm Desert area. The
report is on file with the City.
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD -
COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION advised staff that copies
of facilities planning for storm drains should be
submitted to the California Regional Water Control
Board for review in order to avoid the possibility
of water pollution.
The COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT advised the
following improvements to the Water District system
should be coordinated with further development of the
Project Area: provide increased fire flow capabilities
on either side of Hwy 111; install regional sewers in
streets north of Hwy 111 to tie into existing sewer
lines along Ave 44; any proposals to install storm
drains should be reviewed within the context of the
August 1966 report on drainage for the Palm Desert area.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. suggested that the
following generation factors would be more reflective
of existing local consumption rates:
Residential - 28 kilowatt hrs/day per dwelling unit
Commercial - 186 kilowatt hrs/day per customer
In addition to comments from various public agencies,
WILSEY & HAM noted an inconsistency between the
Redevelopment Plan and the Draft EIR in reference to the
definition of Planned Commercial/Resort. The Redevelop-
ment Plan defined this proposed use to include hotels/
motels, etc. The draft EIR provided an expai„ded defin-
ition to include those uses permitted within the Core
Area Commercial. The correct definition of Planned
Commercial/Resort is that found in the Redevelopment
Plan; the definition within the Draft EIR will be revised
to make the two definitions consistent.
LOWELL WEEKS, COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT,
requested that they be excluded from the Program so that
their tax rate would be unaffected by the Redevelopment
Program. It was the opinion of Council that between
now and the proposed hearing on this matter, the
Redevelopment attorney ROBERT JOEHNCK and the water dis-
trict sit down to develop the true facts in this matter
before it be given at the continued public hearing.
VAL LITCHFIELD, 43-155 PORTOLA, representing the
Concerned Citizens, requested staff consideration of their letter
before further discussion on the EIR. Paul Williams advised that
their letter had been received and would be given proper consideratio
by staff.
Mr. Hurlburt advised that the public hearing had been
published as required by City Ordinance, and that only minutes before
the Council meeting had been reconvened, a letter had been received
from the Concenred Citizen signed by Mrs. Litchfield, President,
dealing with the inadequacies of the EIR for the Redevelopment Plan.
Staff has not had time to evaluate the letter in order to respond
intelligently on the matter.
June 12, 1975 Page 2
Chairman Clark advised that only if the General Plan is
approved can the Redevelopment Agency move on their plan. If it is
not approved, all of the work done so far and the figures discussed
are meaningless. Chairman Clark previously advised Council and
staff that there is $54,000 that will come to the City Redevelopment
Agency based on increased property evaluation.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
Member McPherson moved and Member Benson seconded to
continue the Redevelopment Agency public hearing to the meeting of
June 26, at 8:30 P.M. in new Council Chambers at City Hall; carried
unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:21 P.M.
HENRY B. CIARK, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
HARVEY L- H00,414..‘:teld:!/OL
URLBUA
Executive Director
June 12, 1975 Page 3