Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-10-10MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1996 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Snyder convened the meeting at 5:27 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present Member Jean M. Benson Member Buford A. Crites Vice Chairman Richard S. Kelly Member Robert A. Spiegel Chairman Walter H. Snyder Also Present: Carlos L. Ortega, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager Doug Phillips, Deputy City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, Agency Secretary John Wohlmuth, ACM/Director of Administrative Services Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Pat Conlon, Director of Building and Safety Steve Smith, Acting Director of Community Development Paul Gibson, City Treasurer/Finance Director III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Adjourned Palm Desert City Council/Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Meetings of June 7 and 13, 1996, and the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of September 26, 1996. Rec: Approve as presented. MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE AGENCY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 23 and 24. Rec: Approve as presented. C. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL of Reimbursement to CVAG for Repairs to Telephone System. This item was removed from the Agenda for separate discussion under Section VI, Consent Items Held Over, of the Agenda. Please see that section for Council discussion and action. D. CONSIDERATION of Regional Access Project Foundation Annual Report. Rec: Receive and file. Member Benson asked that Item C be removed for separate discussion under Section VI, Consent Items Held Over. Upon motion by Crites, second by Kelly, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by unanimous vote of the Agency Board. V. RESOLUTIONS None VI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER C. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL of Reimbursement to CVAG for Repairs to Telephone System. Member Benson stated that in reading the staff report, it disturbed her to think that it was tenants in the building who were responsible for this vandalism. She suggested that the Property Manager or staff look into the possibility of having some kind of system for entering that locked room so that they can tell who enters and at what time, similar to the system at City Hall. Mr. Ortega stated that staff would look into this suggestion. Member Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize payment to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments in the amount of $2,620.65 for repairs to their telephone system following vandalism to the telephone lines at the Parkview Office Building, with direction to staff to look into the possibility of installing some kind of system to be able to determine who accesses the locked Electrical Room. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. 2 MINUTES — PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VII. NEW BUSINESS A. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DESERT WILLOW RESORT COURSE PROJECT DESIGN CONTRACT AMENDMENTS. Mr. Ortega noted the report in the packets and offered to answer any questions. Upon question by Member Spiegel, Project Administrator Rudy Acosta confirmed that this request was for $391,000 to move into the second golf course without any final decisions on the hotel. He said this corresponded with a strategy devised by staff in order to meet certain milestones reflected in the schedule to be included in the agreement with Intrawest. Member Spiegel stated that if there was not a hotel agreement that was satisfactory to him, he would not vote for the project, and if the project fell through, we would be building another golf course. He said we are in the process of finishing one of the finest golf courses in the Coachella Valley, and he felt that was enough right now until he know what is going on with the rest of the project. Member Benson said she would add to that and/or a condo development and a hotel in the second phase, not just the hotel. She said she did not feel we should be going into the second phase right in the middle of getting the first phase going, and she felt we were "biting off more than we can chew". She said it would not bother her at all if it delayed Intrawest a year because the City has waited many years for a project in this area. She said it did not hurt her feelings at all to say that the second phase will open in 1998 or 1999 or a grand opening in the year 2000. Mr. Ortega stated that the request was not to build a second golf course, it was basically to hire certain consultants. He said the actual construction project would not be brought to the Agency Board for approval to bid until the Board knows whether it has approved or disapproved the project. He said staff could review that schedule, which would happen long after the project itself is considered. He added that the only consideration for the Board at this time was whether or not it wants to spend the money to hire these firms. Mr. Acosta agreed and stated that Intrawest was in the process of submitting a tentative tract map for approval, and estimates are that the tract map would be brought to the Council in December for its consideration. In the meantime, in order for staff to correspond with the possible consideration and eventual approval of that, staff had to come up with a strategy on how to best meet those schedules. He said there was an exhibit in the staff report that corresponds to what the City's risk financially would be in the months from September to December. In addition, he said there was an escape clause included in the recommendation that at any time the agreements with the consultants could be terminated. Member Spiegel stated that he would not like to commit $400,000 of the City's money toward a project that he is not sure will go forward. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Upon question by Member Kelly as to what the Board would be specifically committing to, Mr. Acosta noted the exhibit to the staff report which indicated the Phase II project budget which showed the projected maximum three month expenditure through the month of December in the amount of $391,000 for all the consultants. Mr. Ortega added that one of the conditions to issuing these contracts to the consultants would be that the Agency would have the right to cancel the agreement at any time as long as the consultants were paid for whatever they had done. Member Crites stated that if the Agency Board says yes to this request, the odds on the Board stopping between now and December 12th are somewhere near zero. Mr. Ortega responded that the process would have staff bring all of the agreements and the project to the Agency and the City Council in December. He said staff had expressed to Intrawest that concern that the Agency Board would be out some $391,000 before the Council even considers the project. Intrawest did come back to the Desert Willow Committee with a letter stating that they would indemnify the City for up to $100,000 of that cost, and a condition has been added that it be a deposit. In addition, a prior agreement between Intrawest and the City indicated they would pay for some change orders for the change of the golf course of about $72,000. Staff had made that a condition that they pay that amount before we would give that order to the architect; therefore, subtracting that money from the $391,000 that would lessen the money out the City's pockets. Member Crites stated that that money had already been taken out to get to the $391,000, and Mr. Ortega responded that only $50,000 was taken out. Mr. Acosta agreed. Member Crites asked if they were then going to give us another $72,000, and Mr. Acosta stated that the $72,000 was taking the $50,000 plus our $22,000. He said their financial risk would basically be in the neighborhood of $422,000, and the Agency's would be $391,000, and if they decided not to proceed with the project, of that $391,000 we would get the $100,000 deposit. Member Benson reiterated that she did not want to give them any money until we see what the project is. Member Spiegel agreed. Member Spiegel moved to deny the request for approval of Desert Willow Resort Course project design contract amendment. Motion was seconded by Benson. Member Kelly stated that he would like to see us be able to move ahead, but on the other hand it was hard to disagree with the principle that we should have a signed contract prior to spending any money. He said he felt we need to somehow explain to our potential partner what the Board's concerns are. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Member Crites asked that the maker and the seconder consider an alternate motion to not take action on this today while expressing to Intrawest the Board's sincere reservations about taking action as well as the idea that if we took action today the action would be negative, and if they wish to present to us a case for moving forward on this, they need to do it. He said there were members Section 4, Mr. Ted Lennon and some other people, who were favorable to moving forward and that he was not arguing that because they are in favor we should move forward; however, he said that those who believe that this is a good investment of money should be here to make the case why we should and that in the absence of that, we will not move forward. Member Spiegel stated he did not agree and said he did not think his concerns for the hotel and the entire project were getting to Intrawest. He said he had tried to explain them and felt that a condo hotel was wrong when you are trying to sell time shares because you are trying to sell two kinds of things that are the same. He said he wanted a hotel there. He added that the reason the Marriott had done fairly well with its time shares was that they were established and they were already there. He said he did not see this happening with this project. This is a piece of property that will someday be on Broadway and 42nd Street after Cook Street is finished, it is a very desirable piece of property that will not get any worse and will only get better, and if it is five years before the property is developed, that did not bother him. He said the City would end up with a great looking golf course, a nice club house, and something we can be proud of. If that land stays vacant, he said he personally was not upset about it. He added that he felt it was important to make sure the needs of the people of Palm Desert are met. Chairman Snyder called for the vote. The motion died on a 2-3 vote, with Members Crites, Kelly, and Snyder voting NO. Member Crites moved to not take action on this while informing both the Desert Willow Committee and Intrawest that if a vote were to be taken now on this, the answer probably would be "no" and that a better rationale from both the Committee and from Intrawest needs to be presented for any consideration of an alternate decision. The motion was seconded by Member Kelly and carried by a 4-1 vote, with Member Spiegel voting NO. VIII. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF RETENTION OF WALL CONSTRUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE TENANT IMPROVEMENTS AT THE PARKVIEW PROFESSIONAL BUILDINGS (Continued from the Meeting of September 26, 1996). Mr. Ortega stated that this was continued because the Board had questions regarding the amounts and what was being done. He said he had both the manager of the buildings and Redevelopment Manager Dave Yrigoyen available to answer any questions. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Yrigoyen reviewed the staff report and explained the recapture times for each of the tenants. He introduced Jerry Schmitz of Mason & Mason and stated that he was the one who had put together the numbers in the staff report. Member Benson stated that her main concern was that she had in the past leased many offices and had to go in and pay the improvements to get it the way she wanted it. She said she felt there needed to be some ratio in that building as far as how long the lease is and how much we are going to spend instead of doing whatever the tenant wants. She said that she felt for future vacancies it should not be our responsibility to be paying for things the tenants want done. Member Spiegel agreed and added that there were certain things the Agency Board should be responsible for, and that should be drawn up in advance, working on any shells that still exist in the buildings so that someone coming in to lease an area that is not finished will be advised that certain things will be paid for by the City, but the rest is up to them. Mr. Schmitz stated that this is exactly what they had done. He said they had agreed to put $15.00 per square foot worth of tenant improvements into that suite, and everything over that amount is paid for by the tenant. In the case of In -Home Health, total tenant improvements are approximately $20.00 per square foot due to its being a shell. He said he had done a survey of other office buildings as to what they pay for shell space, and this is historically what they have been paying in these two buildings. He said typically in the City, they run from $15.00 to $20.00 per square foot. The landlord will pay for the initial improvements, and anything over that is either recouped in the form of higher rent if the landlord does it or the tenant pays that amount before they start their lease. In this instance, In -Home Health will submit a check for the difference between what the total tenant improvements are and $15.00 a square foot. Member Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Ratify the tenant improvements to the Parkview Office Buildings accomplished by Wall Construction for the WMA facility in the amount of $22,558; 2) authorize Wall Construction to construct the tenant improvements for space to be leased by In -Home Health, Inc., at the Parkview Office Building in the amount of $24,668.00. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. B. CONSIDERATION OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PARKVIEW BUILDINGS (Continued from the Meetings of September 12 and 26, 1996). Mr. Ortega stated that this item was continued so that the Agency could see a comparison of what the various companies proposed. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Yrigoyen stated that staff had a report prepared but recommended that the Board continue the matter inasmuch as the members had not had an opportunity to review that report. Chairman Snyder moved to continue this matter to the meeting of October 24, 1996. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. IX. OLD BUSINESS None X. REPORTS, REMARKS, AND AGENCY BOARD ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION A. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR None B. AGENCY COUNSEL Absent C. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY None XI. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None XII. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * XIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None XIV. ADJOURNMENT Member Crites moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:50 p.m. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. ATTEST: SHEILA R. 6 GAN, SE ARY TO THE PALM DESERT REDEVEL VENT AGENCY WALTER H. SNYDER, CH 8