Loading...
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