Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrelim Minutes - City 04/08/2004PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 2004 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Spiegel convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Mayor Pro Tem Buford A. Crites Councilman Jim Ferguson arrived at 3:03 p.m. Councilman Richard S. Kelly Mayor Robert A. Spiegel Also Present: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager/RDA Executive Director David J. Erwin, City Attorney Homer Croy, ACM for Development Services Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Stephen Y. Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Mark Greenwood, City Engineer Amir Hamidzadeh, Director of Building & Safety Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Teresa L. La Rocca, Director of Housing Michael J. Errante, Director of Public Works Robert P. Kohn, Director of Special Programs III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A (CLOSED SESSION ITEMS) None PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Request for Closed Session: ON A MOTION BY SPIEGEL, SECOND BY CRITES, AND 5-0 VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, ADDED A MATTER OF PROPERTY NEGOTIATION AND AN ADDITIONAL CASE OF POTENTIAL LITIGATION TO THE AGENDA FOR CLOSED SESSION CONSIDERATION: Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: 1) Property: NEC Gerald Ford Drive/Portola Avenue Negotiating Parties: Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/City of Palm Desert/Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Property Owner: American Realty Trust Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 3 3 Upon motion by Kelly, second by Crites, and a 5-0 vote of the Council, Mayor Spiegel adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:02 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 4:00 p.m. V. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION. Mr. Erwin reported that there was no reportable action; however, he advised the Council that it needed to take an action to add to its agenda, as noted above. VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilmember Jean M. Benson VII. INVOCATION Councilman Richard S. Kelly 2 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B GRAPEVINE STREET RESIDENTS (see below) addressed the City Council about traffic concerns they have on their street. Residents requested measures be implemented immediately to make their street safer, including those that would reduce speeding and reckless traffic, and eliminate cut -through commercial traffic (e.g. additional stop signs, speed "cushions", and additional enforcement). (This matter was taken up by City Council later in the meeting. Please see action recorded during "City Council Requests for Action," Item XVIII-D.) MS. IRIS ANDERSON, 73-189 Grapevine Street MR. ED TUNISON, 73-820 Grapevine Street MR. LES INKSTER, 73-590 Grapevine Street MR. J. JAMES MILO, 73-570 Grapevine Street MS. JEANNE BRUNING, 73-050 Grapevine Street IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2004 AS "PREVENT CHILD ABUSE MONTH" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Spiegel presented the framed proclamation to a representative of the Prevent Child Abuse - Coachella Valley Council. In turn, the representative provided the City Council with fliers and lapel pins in recognition of the month -long observance. B. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2004 AS "NATIONAL ALCOHOL AWARENESS MONTH" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Spiegel presented the framed proclamation to Danny Leahy of the ABC Recovery Center. C. PRESENTATION TO RECOGNIZE CITY OF PALM DESERT EMPLOYEES FOR EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE - APRIL 2004. Mayor Spiegel and Mr. Ortega recognized the following employees for their outstanding performance: Steve Aryan, Mike Brown, David Flint, Benjamin Druyon, James Bounds, Patty Leon, Janet Moore, Frankie Riddle, Gail Santee, Jose Torres, Daniel Lopez, and Ernesto Navarrette. 3 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING D. APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS VACANCIES ON THE CITY'S ESTABLISHED COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS. Rec: By Minute Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to: 1) Appoint the following applicants to the respective City Committees and Commissions: a) Karel Lambell to the Architectural Review Commission to fill the unexpired term of Richard O'Donnell (12/31/05); b) Thomas Wormley to the Investment & Finance Committee to fill the unexpired term of Murray Magloff (12/31/05); c) Louise Kermode to the Library Promotion Committee to fill the unexpired term of Linda Krull (12/31/06); d) Dan Seymour to the Parks & Recreation Commission to fill the unexpired term of Robert Royer (12/31/04); e) Jane Daugherty and Jerome Pineau to the Citizens' Advisory Committee for Project Area No. 4 to fill the terms of former members Marilynn Hamlet (12/31/06) and Bob Bershad (12/31/04), respectively; f) John Marman to the Sister Cities Committee to fill the unexpired term of Kathy Strong (12/31/04); 2) direct staff to prepare and present to City Council for adoption the appropriate resolution that will provide for an alternate position on the Parks & Recreation Commission, to provide for a constant complement of members on that body. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. E. PRESENTATION OF GOVERNOR'S PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THE WEEK OF APRIL 4-10, 2004, AS "LAND SURVEYORS' WEEK" IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Mayor Spiegel presented the Governor's framed proclamation to and congratulated City Senior Engineer/City Surveyor R. Page Garner. F. PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION FROM SENATOR JIM BATTIN'S OFFICE, CELEBRATING THE OPENING OF THE MAGNESIA FALLS BRIDGE OVER THE SAN PASCUAL CHANNEL. Mayor Spiegel congratulated and presented the Certificate to the City's Director of Public Works, Mike Errante. G. PRESENTATION TO RECOGNIZE NEAL JARRETT, A PALM DESERT HERO. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Spiegel made a presentation of an engraved plaque and a gift certificate to Westfield Shoppingtown Palm Desert, recognizing Mr. Jarrett, a waiter at Romano's Macaroni Grill, for his heroic actions to recover a patron's purse last Friday evening. In further recognition, Palm Desert Police Department's Lieutenant Steve Thetford also presented a Riverside County Sheriffs Department pin to Mr. Jarrett. 4 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 H. PRESENTATION TO COUNCILMEMBER JEAN BENSON. Mayor Spiegel made a special presentation nCecogn tion of heember r birthday enson, a framed letter from President George W. milestone celebrated March 22. X. CONSENT CALENDAR f A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting oMar h 2255, 2004; and the ___--- Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting of March15, 20. Rec: Approve as presented. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 189, 190, 194, and 195. Rec: Approve as presented. C. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY #531 by Teresa Dobrev in an Unspecified Amount. Rec: By Minute Motion, reject the Claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. for D. CITY'S/AGENCY'S PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT the SU PMmRIES Desert February 2004 (Joint Consideration Redevelopment Agency). Rec: Receive and file. E. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE220 by Tommyommy Bahama Palm Desert LLC, 73-595 El Pasee, SuitePalm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. F. MARK ETING COMMITTEE MINUTES for the Meetings of January 13, and February 10, 2004. Rec: Receive and file. 5 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 RESOLUTION NO. 04-22 - A Resolution it s the ofFindings and Authorizing lty of the Palm Desert, California, Setting Fort Destruction of Files from the Department of Building & Safety that Have Been Digitally Imaged (April and May 2003). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt. H. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Purchase Traffic Signal Equipment for Fred Waring Drive Widening (Project No. 653-01). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the purchase of traffic signal emopntent from McCain Traffic Supply, Vista, California, in of $24,788 plus shipping and tax for the Fred Waring Drive Widening from Deep Canyon Road to Washington Street — funds are available in Account No. 400-4399-433-4001. I. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION for Staff to Negotiate for Bus Shelters on Highway 111 and Other Selected Sites. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize staff to negotiate with an individual firm to design and fabricate bus shelters on Highway 111 and other selected sites in the City. J. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Remodeling CabinetBuilding ry (Contract Safety Department Front Counter Space and Addition No. C22570). Rec: By Minute Motion, award the subject li contra titoe oug amgunt all Construction, Inc., Bermuda Dunes, Ca , f $7,710 and authorize the Mayor to execute same — funds are available. in Account No. 110-4420-422-4045. K. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for ProjectsPerformance etr of Constructability Reviews of Capital Improvement No. C22580). Rec: By Minute Motion, award the subject contract to Coachella Valley Construction Services, LLC, Indio, California, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 to perform reviews on an as -needed basis and authorize the Mayor to execute same. 6 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING L. CONSIDERATION of Action by Legislative Review Committee — AB1933 (Pacheco) — Public Records. Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Rec: By and direct staff to Review Committee at its March 1r hey M yorMes signature with regard to prepare a letter of support AB1933 (Pacheco). CONSIDERATION of Action by Legislative Review Committee — AB2264 (Chavez) — M. Housing. ByMinute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Rec:ts and direct staff to Review Committee at �ositilon for the Mayors signature with regard to prepare a letter of opposition AB2264 (Chavez). CONSIDERATION of Action by Legislative Review Committee — N Records. AB2437 (Pacheco) — ByMinute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Rec: and direct staff to Review Committee at its March h � M yorMesignature with regard to prepare a letter of support AB2437 (Pacheco). SIDERATION of Action by the Legislative Review Committee — AB2702 O. CON (Steinberg) — Housing. nse Remov ed for separate consideration under Section XI, Co d nt Itecusms Helld d Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for action. CONSIDERATION of Action by the Legislative Review Committee — SB1212 (Ducheny) — P. Local Government Revenue Balancing Rec: ByMinute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative and direct Review Committee at its March 16, 2004, Ms signature with regard to ff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's SB1212 (Ducheny). CONSIDERATION of Action by the Legislative Review Committee — Q. SB1641 (Alarcon) — Local Government. Removed for separate consideration under Section XI, Co et Itemdiscussion and eld Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes or action. APRIL 8, 2004 7 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 R. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Improvement Security for Tract No. 28818 Mass Grading (Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc., Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to release the subject improvement security for Tract No. 28818 for Marriott Shadow Ridge. S. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Improvement Security for Tract No. 30025 (World Development, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to release the subject improvement security for Tract No. 30025 and accept the accompanying 10% Maintenance Bond for same. T REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Vacate a Portion of Restricted Access Rights on Country Club Drive at Desert Country Plaza (Country Club East, LLC, Applicant) Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to execute a Quitclaim Deed to vacate the subject property. U. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Report on Fred Waring Drive Widening from Deep Canyon to Washington Street. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked that Items 0 and Q be removed for separate consideration under Section XI, Consent Items Held Over. Upon motion by Ferguson, second by Kelly, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by a 5-0 vote. XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER O. CONSIDERATION of Action by the Legislative Review Committee — AB2702 (Steinberg) — Housing. Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated this was the latest version of the ordinance that would require the City to potentially double the density of housing within the City. He asked what else was being done aside from sending a letter of opposition. Senior Management Analyst Pat Scully responded that this bill as being heard by Local Government Committee on April 21 st, and she would be in 8 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Sacramento to testify. She noted that an additional letter had been sent as well. Councilman Ferguson added that the City's lobbyist was also working on this issue. byMinute Motion, concur with the action taken by Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to, the Legislative Review Committee at its March 16, 2004, Meeting, and direct staff to prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to AB2702 (Steinberg). Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. Q. CONSIDERATION of Action by the Legislative Review Committee - SB1641 (Alarcon) — Local Government. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked that the letter of opposition note the City's opposition to having a financial impact report on "big box" etail is related to the matter of local control rather than State mandate because the City is already doing this. Councilman Kelly said he wanted to be sure the message sent to the State Legislature is that the City wants to run its own city rather than having the State run the City. Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, concur with thed direct takenaction staby the Legislative Review Committee at its March 16, 2004, Meeting, prepare a letter of opposition for the Mayor's signature with regard to SB1641 (Alarcon)., with staff to also convey that the City already requires related to the matter of o� rt al control when it considers "big box"retail projects; City's opposition rather than State mandates. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 04-23 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY WORKIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING COMPENSATION COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN CITY VOLUNTEERS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3363.5 OF THE LABOR CODE (SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES). Mr. Ortega reviewed the staff report, noting that this would formalize that when members of the Sister Cities Committee are acting on behalf of the City, they will be covered by Workers Compensation. Upon question by Councilman Kelly relative to the fiscal impact, Mr. Ortega responded there would be no impact. The City works through a Joint Powers Insurance Authority, and it is provided for. 9 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 The City's Risk Manager also noted that there eewas no inj direct ured cost e ndtino premium paid by the City. In the event a vol untunder a City program, they would be considered to bem rather than throughe on the job and d be covered under the Workers Compensation p g involved. This would liability. Any cost incurred v h �pWeer risk covto the injury erage age and lower cost coverage in the event provide a the uryCitybecause the injury would be covered through the the of an injury Workers Comp system, which is no-fault, no -liability damagesrather than having a volunteer use the liability process to Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 04-23. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XIII. ORDINANCES For Introduction: ORDINANCE NO. 1064 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE G CALIFORNIA,TY COUNCIL OF A. THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, DENG SECTIONS 11.01.010 AND 11.01.120 OFTHE EOPALM AESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, HILLSPARKS.TO HOMME/ADAMS AND CA UILLA Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. prov Councilman Ferguson asked if there were enforcement ent provisions if someone has a dog not under voice control that c p Parks and Recreation Planning Manager Jeff We kBureauresponded Land that this would allow the Sheriff s Department and/or Management to deal with situations where someone has a dog that is out of control. ss Cou0ncilman Ferguson moved to waive further reading and Kellyby pa a Or voteCe5 No. 1064 to second reading. Motion was seconded by and carried For Adoption: None 10 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY'S PUBLIC ART COLLECTION AND THE EL PASEO EXHIBITION (CONTRACT NO. C22590). Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Mayor Spiegel asked why this was not on an as -needed basis rather than paying so much per year. Public Arts Manager Richard Twedt responded that these sculptures needed constant attention because of the conditions in the desert. The sculptures get dirty really fast, and they need to be cleaned monthly. He said he had attempted last year to clean the sculptures less frequently, but he had received several complaints from gallery owners about how dirty the pieces looked. Upon further question by Mayor Spiegel, Mr. Twedt responded that this contract would also cover the art in the City's park, but the City would not be responsible for private artwork approved by the City but installed by developers — those private owners would be responsible for their own maintenance. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the subject contract with Michael Volpone, Cathedral City, California, in the amount of $52,000 for a period of one year and authorize the Mayor to execute said contract. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried b a 5-0 vote. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR ADVERTISING SERVICES FOR THE EL PASEO BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (CONTRACT NO. C21051). Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Upon question by Councilman Ferguson, Business Support Manager Ruth Ann Moore confirmed that this was pass -through funding. Councilman Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, approve an amendment to the subject contract with Stephanie D. Green d.b.a. Creative i Group, Palm Desert, California, extending the contract from May 1, 2004, through April 30, 2005, in an amount not to exceed $220,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute same. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. 11 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SPECIAL COUNSEL DR. KENNETH K. BAAR RELATIVE TO AMENDMENTS TO THE MOBILE HOME RENT CONTROL REGULATIONS (Continued from the meeting of February 26, 2004). Councilman Ferguson stated that he would abstain from participation in this discussion as he represented a mobilehome park soon to be in the City. Councilmember Benson also abstained from the discussion as she is a resident at one of the mobilehome parks. DR. KENNETH BAAR stated that he had prepared a list of proposed changes to the City's rent control ordinance, which had been included in the Council packets. This list also noted whether these proposed changes were opposed or unopposed. Of 21 recommendations, approximately 17 were unopposed. While there were some issues that were strongly disputed, the vast majority were undisputed. Some of the changes were legally required pursuant to recent judicial doctrine or were preempted by State legislation; others he had proposed because he felt they were absolutely necessary to make the fair return standard work in a logical manner. Still others were just mechanical, moving things around the ordinance to make it clearer. He reviewed disputed issues as follows: CPI Increase — He indicated in his report that some cities give 100% of the CPI increase annually, while Palm Desert gives 75%. This is a policy issue. A representative of the park owners proposed the standard be 100%. He noted the newspaper reported that he had proposed making the increase standard 100% of the CPI; however, page 11 of his report in essence stated that there are arguments for and against changing that standard, but he did not make a recommendation. Capital Improvement Increases — He said one of his proposals was that when capital improvement increases are granted, an interest allowance should also be given for those capital improvement increases. He felt this was required by judicial fair return doctrine — basically, if someone puts out money and is getting it back over time, they are entitled to some return above just getting the same amount of money back in order to get a fair return. Attorney Fees In the existing ordinance, the prevailing party has the right to be reimbursed for attorney fees when a case goes to court. This raised considerable concern because it resulted in cases 12 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING where the City not only had to pay its legal expenses but also those of the prevailing party as well. He pethatd taking when a park ownerthe other hand, fair return doctrine indicates applies for a fair return adjustment, legal expenses become a business expense that should be considered in order to receive a fair return. Basically, if someone has to go through the fair return process and gets an increase as a result of it, that is seen as a justified expense. Judicial doctrine indicates that has to be considered as an expense. One objection from the residents was that this provision should be reciprocal; if the residents have to pay if they lose, why shouldn't they be reimbursed if they win in a fair return proceeding? There were arguments both ways about this. He felt this ordinance provided a very important coverage to mobilehome owners because there can't be increases when a mobilehome is sold; if that provision were not there, basically the mobilehome owner's equity could be extinguished because if rents could be raised without limit when a mobilehome is sold, the mobilehome could become worthless. He said of the hundred or so cities and jurisdictionsthe Sethat have was o some form of mobilehome rent control, he Y aware few that had provisions that if the residents prevail in a fair return hearing they are entitled to recover their legal expenses. He had also been an expert for numerous cities in fair return cases, there were numerous cases where the park owner has not prevailed and where the residents have expended legal fees, and he had never seen a case where the residents were reimbursed for their legal fees. He was not recommending that the provision be reciprocal because it would be an innovative type of measure, and we are already in a situation where there is a lot of litigation and a lot of dispute about the legitimacy of mobilehome rent regulations in the courts. He amended his recommendation for Section C1 c on page 19 of his report to reflect that this attorney fee provision would be limited to fair return cases. In addition, Section .5 on the page 20 of his report cited "Section 1947.8...", and he said this should not be included as it was not applicable to mobilehome rent controls. In summary, Dr. Baar said most of the recommended changes had no opposition, and most of them were important either to comply with judicial doctrine or to make the fair return standard work in a rational fashion. Other changes were policy issues that could be debated. Mayor Pro Tem Crites noted there was a set of recommendations from Dr. Baar, a number of which were not subject to dispute and some of which were potentially subject to dispute. He said the City h {hd e affected ot, to eommunities knowledge, made sure that every person in one of 13 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 had received knowledge of the proposed changes. He said by law the City was not required to have a public hearing on this issue; however, he felt by good sense, the City should make sure that notification is sent to every affected resident and that an evening is set aside to go over the recommendations one at a time. He felt this was important to make sure that at the end of the process no none, whether park owner or resident, would be able to say they did not have the opportunity for input. Councilman Kelly and Mayor Spiegel agreed. Mr. Kohn suggested that staff send a packet of information to each resident in the affected parks with a cover letter summarizing the proposed changes so the would not have to try to read and understand each and every section. He also suggested that one meeting be held very soon before a lot of the snow birds leave for the summer and that residents of all three parks be invited to attend and provide input. Mayor Spiegel invited public testimony, noting there would be no decision on this matter by the Council at this meeting. MS. PAT BELL, 49-305 Highway 74, Palm Desert, read a prepared statement and distributed copies to the Council and City Clerk (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A"). MR. STANLEY "GLEN" WIESNER, 49-305 Highway 74, #112, Palm Desert, read a prepared statement (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "B"). MS. MARY JANE SMITH, 49-305 Highway 74, #171, Palm Desert, said she wanted to impress on the Council how important it is to them to have the protection of rent control. MR. JAMES E. KIRWAN, 49-305 Highway 74, #160, Palm Desert, said that in his review of the proposed changes, it seemed most of the changes were in the form of the elimination or alteration of the expenses that were allowed the land owner to pass through to the residents. Last week they found out that their park was going to be converted. What this meant to him was that it was possible, if this ordinance were passed the way it stands, the land owner could pass the cost to the residents. The land, having been improved prior to conversion, would then be increased in value at the expense of the residents. The land would then be sold to the residents at this increased value. He said it appeared the residents were without any recourse, and all the weight of this new ordinance as proposed would be in favor of the land owners, who have unlimited sources, legal advice, and funds, while all the residents have is the City Council to stand and speak for them. 14 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Pro Tem Crites noted that the Council had been looking at changes to the ordinance for approximately a year because a number of things in the City's ordinance no longer complied with State law and various court decisions. The Council has no control, input, knowledge, or anything else about a park owner's desire to change to condominiums or something else. MS. MARI SCHMIDT, 49-305 Highway 74, #86, Palm Desert, asked whether the absence and abstention of Councilmembers Benson and Ferguson meant they would not be voting on the ordinance when that time comes, and Mayor Spiegel agreed. She submitted and read a prepared statement (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "C"). MR. GEORGE REX, 49-305 Highway 74, Palm Desert, thanked Council, staff, and Dr. Baar for the efforts put forth at this point. He said he supported everything just presented by Mari Schmidt. He felt overall that Dr. Baar's analysis provided more control to the City, which he felt was good. The park owner would also have more control, but the homeowners' ability to file a petition and seek recourse would be Tess, more restrictive, and more expensive. He discussed the notice residents had received on March 29th regarding a meeting on April 1st to discuss conversion of the Indian Springs Mobilehome Park to condominiums. He felt this was done without proper notice, and the parties asking for the meeting were in violation of the California Civil Code Chapter 2.5, Section 798.53, which requires management to provide to the homeowners of the community a minimum of ten days prior written notice. He said his understanding was that the park owner actually filed a petition April 1st. The letter from the management company was dated April 2nd and was posted April 1st, the day of the meeting. He felt a decision had already been made to move forward with the conversion, and management was not asking residents for feedback. Another meeting was taking place right now, with no notice under the same provisions cited above, to request that those who did not attend this meeting should attend a meeting with legal representation and the management company at the park while the rest of the homeowners were at the City Council meeting. He felt this placed another issue in motion at a very inappropriate time when the rent control ordinance has not been resolved, and it further colored and confused the issues involved. Secondly, the rent control ordinance and the petitions for a condo conversion are intimately related, just as stated by Dr. Baar on page 1 of his report that, "This report does not address issues related to the potential conversion of mobilehome parks to condominium ownership or to other uses." Another issue was the meaning of fair return for rent increases versus discretionary hardship return for the park owner. He said there were no provisions or guidelines that he saw in the recommended proposal of the rent control ordinance for the park owner such as requirement for disclosure. When financial information and fiscal disclosure was requested, it was not presented, and to the best of his 15 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 knowledge, it had not been presented in any of the cases where it was requested. Based on past experience, the park owner has never provided this information. In addition, there were no guidelines for the monitoring of the annual rent increases made by the park owner or capital pass -through on improvements, nor were there any guidelines to verify or certify capital improvements versus deferred maintenance. With regard to the rent increases and the CPI annual rent increases, he said he had done a cursory review of the rent rolls some time ago and found mathematical errors on increases of rent, calculation errors on the CPI, and possibly two capital pass-throughs that were still on the rent rolls that should have been paid off in the 1980's and were still being collected. At the time he did this review, he had contacted Charles Prawdzik, the homeowners' attorney at the time, who had done a similar study, and they agreed there was an issue to be attended to, although it had still not been resolved to this date. He added that he felt more time was needed, and he asked that additional time be given to address these issues. MS. TONI EGGEBRAATEN, 77-564 Country Club Drive, Palm Desert, Attorney, said she was at the Council meeting on behalf of the tenants at Indian Springs Mobilehome Park. She said the message she wanted to communicate tonight more than anything was that the tenants are concerned, and they don't understand the text or the changes. She added that there were sections that she also could not understand after reading several times. More than anything, she asked for a dialog, although she was not certain having such a dialog in a meeting with 300 residents would work very well. She said she had made several suggestions that were "no harm, no foul" to the City and which she did not believe the landlord would object to but that would specifically protect the tenants with respect to procedural rights, and those suggestions were just ignored. With regard to the issue of attorney fees, there was a section in the ordinance that provided that the prevailing party was entitled to attorney fees. Pursuant to that section, the homeowners association had previously recovered fees from the City; however, all the City has to do to cure that is put some language in there that it doesn't apply to the City. The tenants could still recover against the landlord. Tenants need that recourse and need to be able to be reimbursed their attorney fees if they are right. The way it is written now, the City can recover fees and the landlord can recover fees. The only ones who cannot recover fees are the tenants. Mayor Pro Tem Crites suggested that attorneys and/or "interested parties" may work with City staff and Dr. Baar prior to the public meeting. He said Ms. Eggebraaten's point was well taken that a lot of these issues are issues that need, if possible, to be resolved not at a large public meeting. 16 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 MR. ED DIFANI, 49-305 Highway 74, #132, Palm Desert, said when he first moved to Indian Springs, the clubhouse and the streets were in complete disarray. The park owner fixed the building and the streets and then tried to charge a quarter of a million dollars to the tenants for those improvements. He lost the case, and now the tenants were afraid that is what the land owner is trying to do now. MR. CLAY HAGE, 661 Brea Canyon Road, #7, Walnut, California, spoke as the property manager for Palm Desert Mobile Estates. He said he had not received Dr. Baar's packet until yesterday and like the residents had a tough time digesting it. He appreciated the fact that the Council would be postponing any action on the recommendations for a time period. He said he hoped the Council would also extend the invitation to representatives of the park owners. He cited an April 1struling from the United States District Court of Appeals relative to the rent issue. He said it was almost on point to mobilehome rent control, and it addressed the issue of what happens to rent when the ownership of the home changes. He said they had always believed that because rent control has benefitted an individual for a certain period of time, the next person coming in should not enjoy that lower rent if it increases the value of the home. MR. RICHARD UNITAN, 73-450 Country Club Drive, Palm Desert, said he had appeared before Council with regard to annexation of Suncrest Country Club and Palm Desert Greens. He was at this meeting because he saw a notice in the newspaper and wanted to know, now that they had been annexed into the City, whether this rent control issue would affect either of those two developments. City Attorney David Erwin responded that once Suncrest and Palm Desert Greens are annexed to the City on July 1, they will be subject to all City ordinances. Mr. Kohn added that Palm Desert Greens is a resident -owned park, so the rent control ordinance would not apply there. With regard to Suncrest, it was his understanding that most of those units are long-term leases, and rent control would not apply to those either, although there were a few in Suncrest that were on month -to -month leases. MS. ANNE GOOKIN, resident of Indian Springs Mobilehome Park, said she would like to hold her comments until another time. MS. PAT BELL stated that with regard to the gentleman who spoke as a representative of a park owner and asked to be included in these hearings, this was a rent control hearing for the ordinance. She felt it had been largely 17 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 stacked in favor of the park owners, not tenants. She personally objected to park owners being part of future sessions. an Kell said there seemed to be a little suspicion andcriticismriticiSmof Council Councilm Y the Council relative to due pr hosted deal nHe 'g w th rent control, and he felt when the first ordinance was adopted He very strongly that the Council had to adopt the ordinance. mobilehomes es understood the tenants do not own the property on which nd homeowners cannot just pick up and move.is said he felt the Council d that there is a fair would do its very best to make sure everyone decision made, and that the tenants will be protected t tefd so hThe Councey are not il was t the mercy of park owners who want to take advantagece, and that is why the concerned that everyone hold anotherroper meeting and receive input. suggestion was made k Mayor Pro Tem Crites disagreed withMs. Bell of view knownpasr part ofra had every right to come and make theirpoints public dialog, just as the residents had the right to do the same. The Council will do its very best to listen to all points of and try to craft something they believe is good for the City of Palm Desert. Mayor Spiegel agreed with comments made by his colleagues. Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, ask staff to engage in a process of public notification to all residents in affected parks, ensuring first that ample opportunity for dialog with residents and/or representatives ofsetting residents' date'anlons and d time foattorneys a public from various points of view is provided, followed by g meeting on the issue of proposed changes to the Mobile Home tRent ounontro a guBenson Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 3-0 vote, and Ferguson ABSENT. With Council concurrence, Mayor Spiegel recessed the meeting at 5:50 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 5:56 p.m. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ENERGY ` CONSERAV TION AND CO -GENERATION PROJE f om tOhe meeting of March 25, 2004). SE BY NORESCO (Continued Coun cilman Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, continue to the meeting of May 13, 2004. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 3-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Crites and Councilman Kelly ABSENT. XVI. OLD BUSINESS None 18 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS IT RELATES TO A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM PR-5 (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, NITS UNITS PER ACRE)CRA) TO PR-13 PRECISE (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, PLAN/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TO CONSTRUCT 320 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON A 25-ACRE SITE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF GERALD FORD DRIVE, 636 FEET EAST OF MONTEREY AVENUE (73-240 GERALD FORD DRIVE, APN 653-260-029) — PROJECT INCLUDES A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR TOWER ELEMENTS 27 FEET IN HEIGHT AND A HOUSING AGREEMENT (IDENTIFIED AS DA 03-02), WHICH WILL INCLUDE, AMONG OTHER MNosT C/Z 03 04,ISTTNS FOR 31363, AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS Case PP/CUP 03-06, and DA 03-02 (Sares Regis Group c/o Greg Albert, Applicant). Planning Manager Steve Smith reviewed the staff report and recommendation. He noted that some of the tower elements go to as high as 27 feet, hence the need for the requested height exception. Maximum height in the PR zone is prescribed at 24 feet. In the past, Council has granted exceptions to the height limit in instances where there is no impact on adjacent properties and if the design of the buildings is enhanced with the additional height. He stated that the report indicated the applicant was looking at renting the project for ten years nd then converting it to ndicated that whether the condominium. In discussions today, the applicant itime frame gets condensed will be driven by the marketplace, and they do not have any commitment to the ten years. He noted that in the General Plan recently adopted, the Council established a series of performance criteria in order to achieve the high density development potential. Staff outlined findings on page 7 of the staff report. He stated that although the fiscal impact report was not ready at the time the staff report was written, it was received and distributed to Council earlier today, and Nicole Criste was available to provide a brief synopsis of said fiscal impact report. Staff felt the findings necessary for the high density residential had been met. Staff also felt this was an architecturally attractive residential complex with a townhouse feel. The developer had added quality touches to the project including more than 50% of the units having direct access from the garages into the units, balconies, enhanced paving in the auto courts, etc. With regard to the height exception, staff felt the improvements in the architecture supported the exception for the tower elements. He said the housing agreement was attached, and it would provide for 20% of the units to be affordable to moderate income households. Staff felt the 13 units per acre was an appropriate land use given the surrounding land uses. 19 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Upon question by Councilman Ferguson and Mayor Pro Tem Crites, Mr. Drell responded that the Landscape Committee looks at public projects, and private projects are routinely reviewed by Architectural Review Commission. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked that this project be reviewed by the Landscape Committee. He also noted that Mr. Drell, when asked in one of the earlier Planning Commission meetings about the interior auto courts, had responded that asphalt would be horrible because it would end up being an oven and so on. He asked whether there would be stamped concrete and other types of treatments on these interior auto courts. Mr. Drell responded that it would be enhanced paving, and the applicant could describe what it is. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked whether anything was being done, not just with this project but with future projects, to make sure what we get in those projects as far as enhanced paving stays looking that way. He expressed concern that it does not stay looking nice for very long. Mr. Drell responded that maintenance must be done on this decorative paving to keep it that way. He added that there was no expressed provision other than normal property maintenance requirements. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked that such provision be added so that one of the things that helps sell this project remains something that is part of this project. Councilman Ferguson noted that this is the first time for the performance criteria to be applied to a project. He said he had seen this project during the General Plan stage and felt it would be a good role model for setting precedent as to what the Council meant when it implemented these criteria. With regard to the ten-year wait on the affordability component, he said he understood the applicant was going to address this. With regard to the SunLine bus stop, he deferred to Councilman Kelly. Councilman Kelly said he had checked and did not know who the applicant had talked to about the bus stop. Councilman Ferguson noted a statement in the staff report that this project can affirm all seven criteria and, therefore, was deemed eligible. He said he was not sure Council said the project would have to meet all seven, although that was a goal. With regard to the criteria about landscaping, he said his idea of a landscape plan was one that gave him the specimens and showed what exactly would go where. He said perhaps the Landscape Committee could do that when they take a look at it. He asked if there was any kind of public art component to this project. 20 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Mr. Smith responded that there is a condition requiring participation. Upon question by Councilman Ferguson as to whether that was participation in the fund or actually putting public art on the property. Mr. Smith responded that it could be either way. With regard to the housing agreement referenced in the staff report as recommended by the Planning Commission, Councilman Ferguson asked whether it had come from the Planning Commission or from the City's housing folks in conjunction with the developer. Mr. Smith responded that it was discussed with the housing folks back in November/December, although it was not generated by them. Councilman Ferguson asked whether the 20% to be reserved for moderate income households was an adequate number in their estimation. With regard to open space, Councilman Ferguson asked the developer to address issues such as view corridors and things that provide visual relief. He also asked Mrs. Criste to address the issue of fiscal impact to the City. He added that he felt the architecture of the project was fantastic. Mayor Pro Tem Crites noted that in the Planning Commission meeting in August, Commissioner Sonia Campbell made some comments about this project attracting families and whether or not there was sufficient parking and whether or not the parking would, in essence, take up most of the on -street space around that. Subsequent to that, he asked if there were things the applicant and/or staff had done to attempt to address the concerns of Commissioner Campbell. Mr. Smith responded that because Commissioner Campbell supported the project in December, he felt the issue must have been resolved. Upon question by Councilman Kelly regarding the chart which showed fees such as franchise fees and motor vehicle fees, Ms. Criste responded that those were assigned by the State based on first census and then Department of Finance over the years. She said the State allocates per capita revenues based on Department of Finance in years in between the census. Mr. Drell added that every year the Department of Finance sends a survey to the City, and a census estimate is done every year which determines revenue. Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this request. MR. BRETT HARVEY, 45-670 Sugar Loaf Mountain Trail, Indian Wells, spoke as managing director for Merrill Lynch and said he recruits a number of young executives to come down to the desert area. One of the problems 21 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 is affordable housing for those young men and women as they are looking for places to live. He felt this project would be an advantage to some of those people he recruits and brings into the area. He said he also serves as the Bishop in the Latter Day Saints Church, Palm Desert Ward, and one of the big problems he had as a clergyman was finding affordable housing for young members. This project would be a benefit to the Palm Desert Ward for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. MR. MIKE WEINER, Sares Regis Group, 18825 Bardeen Avenue, Irvine, spoke as the developer and said they had been working with the City for almost two years on developing this project, Lomas de Arena, this 320-unit, high -quality residential community in front of the Council. As part of their planning process, they had held several focus groups and presented the project to many interested Palm Desert citizens, business leaders, and educational groups. They also received unanimous approval from the Architectural Review Commission on July 8, 2003. In addition, they had presented the project to the Planning Commission on several occasions. They had improved the plan and ultimately received unanimous Planning Commission approval on December 2, 2003. He said they wanted to present to the Council at this time the approved plan that incorporated the suggestions of the Planning Commission and answered questions regarding the project. He added that Ed Eyerman, their new Business Development Director, would show a Powerpoint presentation. After that, Scott Monroe, Senior Vice President of Property Management, would address property operations, which could include landscape and paving maintenance issues. Mike Boyd, Architect, could answer any questions regarding design, and Rich Cremwoody could answer questions about landscape design, the enhanced paving, view corridors, and visual relief. Mayor Spiegel asked how soon the developer planned on breaking ground after approval and whether Gateway Drive would be at that time. Mr. Weiner responded they anticipated breaking ground toward the end of 2004, and, they would construct Gateway Drive with the project. Upon further question, he responded that Gateway Drive would be four lanes. Mayor Spiegel added that he personally felt Gateway Drive should be at least four lanes. MR. ED IREMAN, Business Development Director for Sares Regis, 18825 Bardeen Avenue, Irvine, California, showed a Powerpoint presentation. Mayor Spiegel asked if the developer planned to keep control of the apartments or if they would have another company come in and buy the apartments. Mr. Ireman responded that this would be for their own portfolio. He noted that on August 19, 2003, the Planning Commission raised several 22 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 separate issues such as parking ratio, lack of pools, density and open space, and drive aisles and their width. Each of these issues was addressed in the subsequent meetings. Regarding parking ratios, the project would have a 2.42 parking spaces per unit ratio. Within that ratio, 50% of the community would receive direct access to their garages, and every single unit would have a garage available to them. He hey would save two e feet.pools Theyt alsoling 4800 square feet and two spastotaling 450qua addressed the concern with regard to street width and showed they were well within the needs of the project as well as meeting the needs of the Fire Department. Courtyards would be enhanced paving gtwith e finish. o asphalt, and a sealant would be applied that would help preserve Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked whether there was any objection to a separate listing of criteria that the developer will maintain those in a way that continues their initial beauty. Mr. Ireman responded that that would be okay as a condition of approval. He showed the proposed architecture of the project, noting it would be a combination of "Frank Lloyd Wright meets Craftsman in the desert." He noted that after taking into account many of the comments and concerns presented by the Planning Commission, they were able to revise the recreation area to include a greater percentage of the community, and the revised plan allowed for a more spread out recreation space, increased pool areas, separation of a tot lot from nearby buildings, and addition of a community garden. Mayor Spiegel asked how long it would take to do the buildout on this project if it is started at the end of this year. Mr. Weiner responded that the project would take approximately two years to build out, and they planned to build it all at one time rather than piecemeal. MR. SCOTT MONROE, Senior Vice President of Sares Regis Group, gave some background information about Sares Regis Group. He noted that there was a fiduciary obligation to ensure that they maintained the project. With regard to maintaining the motor courtyards and the aesthetic appearance of those courtyards and the landscaped areas with pocket planters up against the garages, he said there was an obligation which his management team has to preserve the integrity of the asset, the project. He said when the put together their proformas and secure their partner, they ensure there is adequate funding available to maintain the asset at its highest standard. 23 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Mr. Monroe stated that with the rent structure they anticipated, the average household income would need to be roughly $43,000, with the exception of the affordable component, in order to qualify to live in the project. They did not envision at this juncture to see this as a first-time renter type community; it would be more of a step up community. Also, having individual garages for each of the units would help to maintain the overall aesthetics of the property on a daily basis. As far as qualifying to live in the project, they had screening criteria, the majority based on a FICA scoring method similar to when one applies for a home. He said they want to ensure there are credit -worthy applicants coming through the door; in addition, they want to make sure they not only pay the rent on time but that they respect the property and realize that if they create damage, there will be a financial consequence and perhaps a consequence to their credit. Upon question by Mayor Spiegel, he responded that they do not do police background checks. In the State of California right now, they are not completely computerized for these background checks, and they cannot get a report back in a timely fashion from every jurisdiction that perspective candidate might have resided in. Mayor Spiegel suggested that Mr. Monroe contact the Palm Desert Police Department about this. Mr. Monroe added that in a community of this size, he would anticipate the full-time employee count to be six to begin with, going up to eight as the property matures. Mayor Spiegel asked whether there was any thought given to having a preschool where the children are taken care of if both parents or a single parent is working. Mr. Monroe responded that the State of California allows day-care within apartments, although there are certain limitations to that. He added that they typically did not find in their residential communities of this size that there is enough need among the residents to support an independent day care operation. He noted that it was extremely difficult to get consensus among the ownership when you have an institution partner on the insurance requirements; institutions are really risk -averse, and while it would be enjoyable to have that benefit, typically the institutional clients shy away from it because of the risk associated with having a day-care facility. MR. MIKE BOYD, Architect/Planner, summarized the project. MR. GEORGE MARZICOLA, 71-876 Vista Del Rio, Rancho Mirage, asked that the Council look forward and consider where Palm Desert land use will go from here. He said working men and women will soon not be able to afford the cost of maintaining a $350,000 residence. He said one practical 24 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 answer was this project before Council for evaluation and approval. He asked for Council's support and approval of this well -planned and timely y MS. NICOLE CRISTE stated she wished to address Councilman Ferguson's question with regard to costs. In each of the scenarios in the fiscal impact analysis, the third to the last line was the cost analysis, and that included both general funds and public safety expenses. She said it was the same per capita costs that were applied to the overall analysis done for the General Plan. MR. ROSS VEESER, 74-401 Hovley Lane East, Apartment #728, Palm Desert, stated that as a resident of Palm Desert, he would like to see mo quality apartments built such as this. re With no further testimony offered, Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearin g closed. Councilman Ferguson asked who had drafted the housing agreement. The applicant responded that the draft was provided by staff and was revised several times to refine it to this particular project. He said he thought it was an agreement that has been used by the City in the past. Mr. Drell stated it had been staff's experience, with projects that have been built in the City and in which the City has participated with density bonuses, that density bonuses alone do not produce affordable housing. When One Quail Place was built, the developer was not only given 22 units per acre, the City issued taxes and bond financing for it. That generated 20% low and 80% medium/low income housing. Subsequently, the housing market has changed and gotten much worse in terms of cost. This particular project was one that is being proposed at a relatively low density at slightly more than half of what One Quail Place was. Right now the City is not offering any financial incentives. Under the density bonus law, technically to require low income housing, the City has to provide both density and financial incentives. The applicant is making the 20% units available at moderate income levels, which is the proforma can allow without any incentives. It is now up to the City to provide those financial incentives to lower that moderate level to the low level, and the applicant is willing to participate, but the economics of the project doesn't allow him to do it himself. Upon further question by Councilman Ferguson, Director of Housing Teresa LaRocca responded that she had seen the original agreement and had made some recommendations. She said it was her suggestion that the affordable units be at a lower income. She said she was convinced at that time that 25 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 given the nature of this project and the level of the project, perhaps it would not be feasible. With regard to the issue of the bus stop, Mr. Drell said there had been numerous discussions in general about the future bus route which will occur throughout the University Park area. Unfortunately, bus routes are not planned until there are riders, and there are no riders until there are residents. He said there had been discussions about an isolated loop which will extend from Cook Street to Monterey, Gerald Ford to Dinah Shore and back. They are aware and agree that at some point in time, that route will be appropriate, but until there are people living there and until businesses develop, it will not happen. Councilman Ferguson stated he would like to see this public hearing continued. With regard to the seven criteria and the applicant not having to meet all of them, he said he had gone through all seven of them and gave a ranking of one to five. For example, he gave fiscal impact four points because that is exactly what the City is asking for. Architecture he gave five points because he felt there were a lot of unique elements, and he was very impressed by it. Proximity to school he gave a five because the project is right across the street. He said he still had a question about SunLine. Ownership and affordability were two areas he scored the lowest because the applicant's team sat through months of discussions about the Council making a fundamental policy commitment to providing affordable housing and higher densities to house more workers here. While this is a great quality project, if a person has to earn $42,000 or more to live there, that is not affordable. If someone has to go to Indio in order to afford to buy a house, he did not feel the ownership element was met. He was concerned with the housing agreement allowing the developer to basically buy out of it for $3,000 per unit, and he asked why the developer wouldn't just buy his way out of it and take higher rents, particularly if the market is good. He added that he did not see this meeting any of the objectives, which is what drove the whole high density bonus to begin with. He said he would like the developer to take a look at all five of these areas and perhaps try to strengthen them up a little bit, particularly the ones he just discussed. Councilman Kelly agreed with Councilman Ferguson. He said while no one said the applicant had to meet all seven criteria, the idea was that those would be used as a gauge as to what kind of job the developer did in the planning. If the density is going to be raised, the developer ought to do better job. He said he had always objected to increased density out there. He added that he would agree with continuing this public hearing to allow the developer time to work out some of the areas of concern. 26 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated that with regard to planning, fiscal impact and transportation, he felt the developer had done a good job. With regard to landscaping, the developer will either do the job or not get out of that group. With regard to the issue of percentage of residential units available for home ownership, he said he was caught in a quandary. If, over time, all of this converts to ownership, the City was back to the issue of not providing much availability of rental units. He said he would prefer to see these projects as half rental/half ownership or something like that. He was left with just the issue of affordability and the 20% at moderate income, which he was willing to continue talking about. Councilman Ferguson stated that with regard to ownership, the developer is going to wait ten years before they look at any ownership. The developer stated that the ten years was in response to a question about a typical time line on a conversion. Most developers wait ten years because of the construction liability. That would not necessarily be the case on this project, and these could go to home ownership sooner than ten years. Councilman Ferguson expressed concern that this is the first project, and other projects will come after and want the same thing. He said with regard to the landscape, the developer will look at open space and some of the configuration issues there. Ms. LaRocca will have some time to work with the developer on the affordability aspect, which is vitally important to him. With regard to ownership, he said he was willing to discuss this. He also said he would like the developer to call SunLine and find out whether or not a route was being planned, what the time line is for that route, where the closest route was projected to be, etc., rather than just being told by Planning staff that at some point there will be a bus line. Councilman Kelly said his encouragement for ownership would be that the project would be designed for ownership from the beginning, not half rental and half ownership, which he felt was a potential problem. If this developer has experience doing that somewhere else and it is very successful, he said he would like to see it and hear some comments from people that live there, half owners and half renters. The applicant noted that typically, it would be all rental or all ownership. Councilman Kelly said it looked like the developer was developing a rental, but because the City was encouraging ownership, the developer added the ownership in there so they would rate better in the seven categories. The applicant responded that the intention was to develop a condominium project for rent. Currently their intention was to rent it; however, they were 27 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 evaluating that with the market, and it could change to ownership much sooner than the ten years depending on the market requirements. The applicant stated that to build a project of this quality and the density they had come up with, they could certainly subsidize the affordable housing component, although they would need some help with that. He said they had spent a lot of time working with staff and Ms. LaRocca to see what they could do. He said they came up with a program they felt would be acceptable, and they would lock in 20% of the project at the moderate income level for 55 years. Councilmember Benson moved to continue the public hearing to the meeting of May 13, 2004, in order to provide Applicant with time to further refine issues, including landscaping/open space, affordability, and SunLine route access. Motion was seconded by Ferguson. Councilman Ferguson commented to the developer that they had done an outstanding project. Unfortunately, this is the first one where the Council is trying to grapple with the seven high density issues. He said his fear was that the next person that comes in with a project is going to pencil out a maximum return on investment with a high quality project and no affordability and basically say this developer did it. He felt the developer could fine tune this at not a great deal of expense and come back with something that is really and truly first-class. Mr. Weiner noted that one of the issues he was dealing with was a financial commitment on the project which was going to run out shortly. Councilman Kelly said he did not deny that there need to be rentals, but he felt ownership was the ambition of everyone. He did not think it made sense to try to mix rentals and ownership. He added that one of the problems in the City was absentee ownership with rentals, and people who own their own homes was not where the City's Code Enforcement staff are having problems. Mayor Spiegel called for the vote, and the motion carried by a 5-0 vote. 28 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 B. CONSIDERATION OF GRANTING SECOND READING TO AN ORDINANCE FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-2, EXPANDING PLANNING AREA #3 OF THE WONDER PALMS MASTER PLAN, AND A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN FOR 122,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE OFFICE SPACE, 110,880 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE RETAIL, INCLUDING ONE DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT ADJACENT TO GERALD FORD DRIVE, A THREE-STORY HOTEL WITH UP TO 130 ROOMS, A HEIGHT EXCEPTION FOR TOWER ELEMENTS, AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS IT RELATES THERETO FOR 23.6 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COOK STREET AND GERALD FORD DRIVE (37-001 COOK STREET) Case Nos. C/Z 03-10, PP 03-11, and DA 03-03 (Rick Evans, Applicant). Planning Manager Steve Smith reviewed the staff report in detail. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked whether there was any structural reason for not having an acceleration lane and pedestrian bridge over Cook Street south of the mid block entry on Cook Street, as stated in the staff report. Mr. Smith responded that there was nothing physically there at this point in time that would bar that. He said the plan would need to be amended in order to accomplish that. Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated there was another way to get that lane and bridge, and that would be to modify the building footprints. Mr. Smith stated that the plan was the footprints, and he agreed that would have to be modified to accommodate the lane and bridge at that location. Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated one of the concerns he raised at the last meeting was about heights of the towers that are on the corner across from the Arco station. He said he did not see any comments in the staff report about that. Mr. Smith responded that the tower elements were not discussed or altered. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, he confirmed that the Hampton Inn was three-story. He continued with the staff report, noting that part of this request before Council was a project identification sign which would be approximately 84 square feet. The applicant was proposing that identification sign in lieu of the smaller signs which are permitted under code but are limited to 40 square feet in area each. The sign would have the photo simulation of the project on it with some copy over it. A similar sign 29 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING was done for Desert Crossing, and it seemed to work fine, and staff would support that request. He offered to answer any questions. With regard to entrance #1 as shown on the circulation element, Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked if there was haney here to the solutht be a deceleration lane to the north andan acceleration Mr. Smith responded there was nothing that would prevent this being done; however, he said he would defer to City Engineer Mark Greenwood. Mr. Greenwood stated that with the recent widening of Highway 111 at the Cuistot Restaurant, the subject had come up with regard to the traffic that is turning right further up ahead and whether they should be trapped into that driveway or allowed to bypass that driveway in the auxiliary lane. He said he felt it was better to let them bypass that lane. They had the option of turning into that driveway or to bypass it and make the right turn. With regard to whether this would affect the ability to build a pedestrian bridge, he said it would not. Upon further question by Mayor Pro Tem Crites as to whether he would rather have it go straight through and allow people to use it as a turning lane, he said he would rather have the traffic use it as an auxiliary lane where they can either turn right at the driveway they are nearest to or bypass that driveway and make a right turn at the next driveway. Councilman Ferguson stated he thought when the City was doing the General Plan and this project in particular, there was discussion about a tunnel rather than a bridge, something that could accommodate a bike or a golf cart. It was discussed to do one at Gerald Ford and Portola and then one here so that folks from the apartments at that end of town could ride their bikes to school and not have to cross major north/south arterials. Mayor Spiegel said discussions were about ways to get across. He said he personally would be opposed to a tunnel. Mr. Drell stated that discussions were held regarding a tunnel linking Desert Willow II with Desert Willow III, but he did not think there had been discussions about a pedestrian tunnel. Upon question by Councilman Ferguson, he said this bridge would accommodate a bike. Councilman Kelly said his experience with tunnels were that they were dangerous places where lots of bad things happen. It was also not pleasant for people having to clean up the tunnels, and he would not recommend one. Mr. Drell noted that in terms of the bike path, staff was proposing that bicyclists would either be directed down Technology to the Spine Road to the 30 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 University or directed through the project itself and bypass to a great extent Gerald Ford and Cook Street intersection. Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this request. MR. RICK EVANS, 74000 Country Club Drive, Suite H-2, spoke as the developer of the project. With regard to the entrance sign area, Councilman Crites said he wanted to be sure there would be sufficient room for public art at the entrance to the City, as was done at the entrances from Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage into Palm Desert. Mr. Drell responded that there would be approximately 12-14 feet of horizontal space after leaving three feet on either side between the artwork and the sidewalks. Mayor Spiegel asked for the time line on this project. Mr. Evans responded that he had hoped to start construction in late summer or early fall, with the first phase to open in spring. With respect to the question of the pedestrian bridge and the subsequent effect of the acceleration/deceleration lane, he pointed out that there is enough room between the current building and the required setback to have the acceleration lane continuous. If the acceleration lane were to be continuous, the design for that entrance would need to be redesigned. He said he was not in favor of an acceleration lane because he felt the current design was a little bit safer. With regard to the bridge, he preferred the proposed location because he felt it would be more logical and more convenient for the students. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, he responded that all of the office buildings are one-story in the back, and there are two two-story buildings in the retail office stage. Upon question by Councilman Ferguson, he said the temporary marketing sign was designed to go right at the corner of the project, set back sufficiently to be comfortable at that location. He said it would have reflective materials to be better seen at night. Mayor Pro Tem Crites expressed concern about the height of the two towers at Gerald Ford and Cook. Mr. Evans stated they had looked at that concern and felt that bringing the elevation down would destroy the overall look of the project. He said they were not intended to be signage locations but were really intended to be architectural features. Upon further question by Mayor Pro Tem Crites, he said he believed these towers would be 34 feet tall. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing closed. 31 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Councilman Ferguson said he felt this was a good site plan when he first saw it and felt it was still a good site plan. Councilman Ferguson moved to: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1059, relating to C/Z 03-10 and DA 03-03 2) waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 04-26, approving PP 03-11, subject to conditions; 3) by Minute Motion, approve the project marketing sign, as requested by the Applicant; 4) include provision for an acceleration lane out of the main entrance to the project. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. C. CONSIDERATION OF A CITY COUNCIL REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS AND CINGULAR WIRELESS TO CONSTRUCT A 75-FOOT HIGH MONOPINE WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER WITH TWO ADJACENT EQUIPMENT SHELTER BUILDINGS WITHIN A 25-FOOT X 60-FOOT FENCED AREA — PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED 300 FEET SOUTH OF COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND 1,300 FEET EAST OF EL DORADO DRIVE, AND IS PART OF A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SUBSTATION Case No. CUP 04-01 (Nextel Communications and Cingular Wireless, Applicants). Associate Planner Francisco Urbina reviewed the staff report, noting that surrounding land uses included the Indian Ridge Country Club golf course to the south and to the east and the maintenance facility for the Indian Ridge Country Club to the west. To the north across Country Club Drive as Palm Valley Country Club. He said the Architectural Review Commission reviewed the new 75-foot-high monopine and concluded that due to the existence of several mature, 35-foot-high Mondale pines, 30-foot-high evergreen bottle trees, and several evergreen shrubs at 7-10 feet high, they did not see the need to require planting of any additional pine trees. The Commission thought the cell tower would be adequately camouflaged by this monopine appearance. However, at the Planning Commission meeting, there was a resident from Indian Ridge Country Club who objected to the new monopine because it would be 12 feet higher than the existing 63-foot-high monopine and the new one would be located 40 feet closer to homes to the south at Indian Ridge Country Club. This homeowner said he was trying to sell his house and claimed the real estate agent told him because of the existing monopine, he might have to lower the price $10,000 of $15,000 in order to sell it. Also at the Planning Commission meeting, there were letters of opposition presented from the Indian Ridge Homeowners Association Board of Directors and the Indian Ridge Homeowners Association Manager stating their opposition. The manager stated in her letter that after the existing 63- foot-high monopine was constructed last year, the Homeowners Association started receiving letters from Indian Ridge homeowners complaining about the appearance. Since that time, staff had received three letters of 32 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 opposition from homeowners who were concerned not only with the impact on views to homeowners at Indian Ridge but also the impact on views to golfers using the golf course. The applicant chose the site because there is existing poor cell phone coverage for Nextel and Cingular customers. He said they did not have much of an alternative as far as locating the cell tower on a commercially zoned or industrially zoned property because the nearest commercial property to the west is at the northwest corner of Cook Street and Country Club in the Ralph's shopping center. Locating the cell tower there would not completely solve the poor cell phone coverage for this area between Washington and Cook Street. Although the property and surrounding properties were zoned planned residential, the existing site was used for public utilities, the Edison substation and the existing 63-foot-high monopine which serves Verizon Wireless and Sprint PCS. The monopine design was chosen over monopaim in order to accommodate co -location, allowing two carriers on one monopine pole instead of requiring construction of two monopalms if they had chosen the monopalm design. In granting approval of the 75-foot-high monopine, the Planning Commission granted an exception to allow a wireless cell tower to locate on residentially zoned property. Staff's recommendation was that the Council affirm the Planning Commission approval of the conditional use permit. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, Mr. Urbina responded that the reason for the different heights between the existing cell tower and the proposed cell tower was that there needs to be vertical separation distances achieved between the two existing carriers' and the two proposed carriers' antennas so that there is not signal interference. Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked whether staff had independently verified the need for the 12-foot increase or if staff had accepted what the applicant's had advised. Mr. Urbina responded that staff had accepted what the applicant had advised. Mayor Pro Tem Crites said he would want to know independently if what they tell us actually needs to be done. He also asked whether staff had any data indicating whether the height could be reduced and perhaps have the tower at 50 feet in height. Mr. Urbina responded that staff did not have independent data. Councilman Ferguson stated it was his understanding that during the comprehensive zoning ordinance review, a cell phone tower ordinance was worked on, and there was an independent consultant at that time who was providing assistance. Mr. Drell responded that this was correct. He said the height was a combination of the applicant getting the coverage they want and the issue of separation. He said it would be pretty easy for the applicant to show what the coverage difference would be if they lowered them and the impact that 33 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 would have on their coverage. He said he believed they did not have the desire to make the towers any taller than they have to be because it would cost more money. Councilman Kelly said he felt before hiring a consultant to tell the Council whether the tower has to be that tall, the Council should first determine if it would approve that height anyway. He added that he was not prepared to approve that height. Councilman Ferguson stated that included in the packets was a letter from Marc Pevers which seemed to indicate that the Planning Commission was sold a bill of goods on what the Homeowners Association position was at Indian Ridge. He asked what was the representation made with the position of the HOA to the Planning Commission. Mr. Drell responded that it was opposition. The conclusion was that there were not any good alternatives short of saying they could not serve this area. Councilman Ferguson stated that with one Commissioner absent and one abstaining, the vote was 2-1, and that did not sit well with him, especially since the one who was absent seemed to indicate the vote would have been 2-2 had she not been ill. Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated that he had gone out to look at the existing cell phone tower earlier that day and felt it less than met any kind of aesthetic criteria. Another thing he felt the applicant needed to look at was the type of palm trees that are used at St. Margaret's which he felt were Tight years ahead of the old phone palm trees. Mayor Spiegel agreed the two towers at St. Margaret's were very well camouflaged and people really don't see them because they look so much like palm trees. Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this request. MR. STEVE STACKHOUSE, representing Cingular Wireless, said he was with a company called VelociTel, 18071 Fitch Avenue, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92614. He said as it had been stated, what they were trying to do was accomplish some coverage that was unfortunately in the middle of a residential area with not a lot of commercial or industrial or alternative opportunities. When their site acquisition team went out and tried to secure an appropriate candidate, given the constraints of the search range that the carriers provide saying this is where we need to go, find us a site, they took that map, went out to the area, and started identifying candidates. In this instance, that list of candidates became a very short list very quickly because there were no other alternative candidates. He said they initially looked at the Indian Ridge Homeowners Association maintenance yard, and they 34 PRELIMINARY MINUTES APRIL 8, 2004 PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING inquired as to whether there might be the possibility of locating there. That was not pursued because it was quickly realized that with the Edison substation, that is where they needed to go. They also realized that given all of their maintenance vehicles and the equipment in their maintenance yard, it did not appear they had much in the way of any viable space where the tower could be located. They then pursued the Edison substation site as the very best candidate for their coverage objectives. Councilman Ferguson asked whether Mr. Stackhouse had discussed with the folks at Indian Ridge about doing a monopalm like Mayor Pro Tem Crites suggested. Mr. Stackhouse said he did not believe this had been discussed. Councilman Ferguson stated that by Federal law, the Council could not prohibit cell phone towers, but the City can regulate whether companies co - locate or not and can dictate aesthetic design standards on the structure itself. He said if he were on the Indian Ridge Board of Directors and had a choice of looking at this tower, even if it is shorter, he felt it would just compound the ugliness of it. He said the City was working with the applicant to find a place to put a grove of natural palms with a monopalm, which would cost the applicant a little bit more money, but this is not a cheap development. The applicant made reference to the industrial use that Edison has here, but the applicants own photograph shows it is completely screened with landscaping. Residents of Indian Ridge had investment - backed expectations in their homes, in this property, and while it might be cheaper to co -locate, the law allows the City to deny that. Perhaps the applicant's option is to talk with Indian Ridge about a better location. Mr. Stackhouse stated one of the reasons Nextel and Cingular, as well as Verizon and Sprint before them, went with the Edison substation is that Edison, being the top utility company they are, has what they refer to as a master lease agreement with all the carriers. What that means is Edison has already worked with and hammered out an agreement with all the carriers so that if there is a site that is their property that is suitable to his clients' siting criteria, they know Edison is a willing landlord they can go to and advise they need to locate in this area. They know Edison would be agreeable to that given the design aspects of it. That is a big part of being able to secure a site when, in fact, oftentimes if you pursue an HOA, they may have little or no interest, they may be indifferent, or it may be that the management might allow a company to located there but the membership or the board may say they are not interested and vote it down. The fact that there was already a monopalm there set precedent, and they thought, as had been directed by City staff, that when not possible to locate in a He noted they had anotherlisit consideration should be given to co -location. where they were looking at going on one side of the street with an HOA, but the HOA was not interested and were not willing to work with them. They considered a municipal water district property, but upon investigating that 35 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 with staff, staff said they would rather they go on the other side of the street because Verizon was just approved at this location, and staff wanted his client to co -locate adjacent to them. He added that he felt they had been going by the direction provided by City staff towards a co -location effort. He said were they to be required to go with separate monopalm structures, that would take additional time to even evaluate whether or not this site could facilitate that or if Indian Ridge Homeowners Association would even be willing to allow them to locate on its property. His understanding was that the response given to staff by Indian Ridge Homeowners Association thus far was not only no, it was "absolutely not." Mayor Pro Tem Crites asked if it was Mr. Stackhouse's desire this evening to have a decision made at this meeting as to the proposal. Mr. Stackhouse responded that his desire would be to have a yes vote on the proposal; however, if the vote was not going to be approval, he would rather have the matter continued to sort out some details. Councilman Kelly stated there was a comment in the staff. report relative to the need for a microwave, and the purpose for that was to use microwave instead of hardwire. He said this was another area where the applicant could not require that much height because hardwire could be used. Mr. Stackhouse stated one of the reasons the monopine was so tall was that they were offering a ten -foot additional cone to the tree to increase the appearance of the monopine and make it look as realistic as possible, whereby Sprint only had about a five-foot cone above their antennas. If so desired, and in an effort to reach a compromise, he said they could reduce the height of their monopine by at least five feet by reducing that cone to where they have five feet above the antennas and make it 70 feet instead of the 75 feet. Because this is a substation with high voltage, and because there was such a relatively smaller area that was permissible for Sprint and Verizon to pull their hard copper lines into the site, Edison already put them on notice that it would be difficult to have Nextel and Cingular put their lines in on top of or beside or anywhere in close vicinity to the existing lines. Cingular, as an alternative design, had decided that it would bring telco lines into their site via the microwave dish rather than hard copper wires because if they were to do copper wire or fiber, they would have to implement a positron and/or huffman box, which is kind of a filter, so that there couldn't be any electrical surges that might come through the telco lines and into the systems that would cause damage. Upon further question by Councilman Kelly, he said it was his understanding it could be done with hardwire but with great difficulty if at all. Councilman Ferguson said he felt this was a horrible location, even if the tower is 10 or 20 feet shorter. Having the first tower there he felt was a 36 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 nightmare, but adding a second one was even worse. He said he would like Mr. Stackhouse to go back to square one, take a look at the maintenance yard at Palm Desert Resorter, look at the substation in Indian Wells, work with Indian Ridge if they are willing to and listen to them, look at St. Margaret's and the monopalm and what is attractive about it, and try to do something that is aesthetically compatible with Palm Desert's community standards and not just take the quick and easy route. He asked if Mr. Stackhouse would rather have a no vote tonight or if he was willing to make that effort which he feels the applicant should have done in the first place. Mr. Stackhouse responded that he would prefer consideration, favorable hopefully, but if not, they were willing to have the matter continued to see what they can sort out. He noted that they really could not go a mile in one direction or another; this is where they need to provide the coverage. If the matter is continued and the applicant is not to reach agreement with any of the surrounding homeowners associations, that would leave them no choice but to come back to this site. Mayor Spiegel noted that the photo of the substation showed the existing monopalm; however, he saw in the foreground five palm trees, which looked to be on the other side of a fence. A monopalm in there would not be seen at all because of the existing palm trees. He also felt the applicant should pursue the possibility of locating the tower at the Indian Ridge maintenance yard. Additionally, if the Indian Ridge Homeowners Association does not want this pine tree, he did not believe it was going to happen. Councilman Ferguson said if the residents of Indian Ridge look at the monopalms at St. Margaret's, he was comfortable something could be worked out so that a place could be found to put these monopalms. He added that he personally felt Edison was the worst possible site, and perhaps Indian Ridge could use some of that revenue as opposed to giving it to Edison. MR. J AMES LEE, 1590 Milliken, Unit H, Ontario, California, said he worked for a company that was contracted to work for Nextel Wireless. He noted that it was not a cost issue that made them want to co -locate with Cingular, but the City encouraged them to do so. Whether it is a co -location with a cluster of palms or a co -location with two antennas on one pole, that wasn't the driving force. The driving force was that there was only one area they could go, and there was only one space for one pole. The City encouraged Cingular to work with Nextel. MR. RON POGUE, 907 Box Canyon Trail, President of the Indian Ridge Country Club Homeowners Association, spoke in opposition to the addition of the tower. He said they had a landscaping committee and an architectural 37 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 committee at Indian Ridge. They hadstandards Indian Ridge.Scaping palette Homeowners which was the original design intent purchased there for that reason, and things like this � of the coere very untry club ve. The property adjacent to the Edisonproperty adjacent rather than part of the HomeownersAssociation, landscape that suerrounds the maintenance yard that was discussed and the Edison substation was all golf course ll maintenance meet and d sc uss this further with part of the country club. He was sure they would be win g the representatives from Nextel and Cinglar. encoura es locations outsidesaid this was a nof d residential area, and the zoning ordinanceg residential areas in commercial areas. He said the other picture that was shown that showed several palm treeswas really the north boundary of the and that was the furthest point Edison substation on Country Club Drive,ther see away from the golf course and the homes. He would the soaat least frohm e tower moved that direction and maybe brought down a the residential area and the golf course at this meeting were also clonce ve. ns He added that concerns raised by Council of residents of Indian Ridge. MS. DANA BROWN, Indian Ridge Homeowners Association Manager, stated that no one had come to their office and speak to anyone regarding the 75-foot-high tower. They had not received notice of the first Commission meeting until after the fact. Only a few of the homeowners on White Horse Trail received notice from the City. He said Mr. Urbina had received a letter from Will Gill, who is the General n eand they werre� n opposition r the country club rather than the Homeowners Association, as well. MR. ALIBABA FARZANEH, 39902 Newcastle Drive, had PalmD esert, said he two years was only a few yards away from this tower. He saidspent as a consultant for GTE, and he agreed with ayor Pro Tm He said ae therites radiohwaves at the tower does not need to be as tall asp posed. will travel as low as even ground level. He did not feel the first antenna should be there, and it certainly was not necessary to have another one at a greater height. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Spiegel declared the public hearing closed. Upon question by Mayor Spiegel, Mr. Stackhouse responded that he did not want Council to vote on this matter tonight and would rather Council continue the matter. 38 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to continue the public hearing to the meeting of May 27, 2004, in order to provide Applicants with time to find a potential different location and possibly utilizing different equipment or technology (e.g. monopalm vs. monopine; hardwire vs. microwave). Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XVIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1 Fred Waring Widening --Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact Mr. Ortega advised the City Council that the subject Negative Declaration was being circulated, with comments due prior to the next City Council Meeting. He said that City staff had been meeting with impacted homeowners, two more meetings have been scheduled, and the primary issue being raised was noise on Fred Waring. However, one of the issues is related to design --whether or not to permit traffic into Palm Desert Country Club --asking City Council to think about this issue. He asked the City Council to forward its comments on the Negative Declaration as soon as possible. 2. Senator Ducheny — Hertzberg Initiative — Mr. Ortega commented that Senator Ducheny was part of a group floating a bill that may implement the Hertzberg Initiative, and the City is very concerned. He explained the bill would shift VLF (Vehicle License Fees) away from cities to schools and would swap sales tax. He said Senator Ducheny agreed to engage in a conference call on Monday, April 12, at 4:00 p.m., and he asked for two City Councilmembers to participate with him and Redevelopment Agency staff in his office. With City Council concurrence, members of the Legislative Review Committee (Councilmen Ferguson and Kelly) were authorized to participate in Monday's Conference Call. B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. CITY CLERK None 39 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2004 D. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Parking Along Country Club Drive — Councilmember Benson reiterated her request for staff to investigate the issue of parking along Country CIb lve in the e today andnity of Manor Care. believed they were She had counted 12 carsthere Manor Care employees. She said the person who contacted her with the concern had to park abk In°nd trafficecars n ordertotwere get to already along Country Club a the facility to visit her mother there. The reason there was overcrowded on -site parking was because Manor Care had initiated an outpatient orthopedic treatment center. The constituent mentioned her situation to the manger, who replied it was because the City wouldn't sell any property for them to add on to their parking. Councilmember Benson asked staff to again explore red -curbing Country Club Drive in this area. City Councilmembers concurred. 2. Gra evine Street Traffic Concerns — Councilman Kelly tion asked his colleagues if they would consideradding can f the residents' concerns to this agenda so measures could be taken immediately. Coun cilman Kelly moved to add consideration of this matter to the Agenda. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize: i one location for Pran add t nal Tem Crites and Councilman Kelly to work with staff to identify at least stop sign and place same; 2) painting a double yellow line on the entirety of the street and c place "No Commercial Traffic" signage as needed; 3) cadrried by a 5-itional IO ote.rcement on Grapevine Street. Motion was seconded by Crites and 3 Fred Warinn/Dee° Canyon Accident — Mayor Pro Tem Crites noted that a suspect had been apprehended in the recent hit and run vehicular fatality at the subject intersection. However, he wondered how a driver with numerous repeated violations was still driving. He asked the Police Department to look into why this driver hadn't been suspended earlier. 40 PRELIMINARY MINUTES PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING o Ci Council Committee Reports: None o City Council Comments: 1. City Council Liaison Reports. APRIL 8, 2004 None 2. Prevailin Wa e — Mayor Pro Tem Crites said hed just bor ead an article about an issue with the Department Relations, requiring prevailing wage for all volunteer programs in the State of California. He felt this would have a substantial impact on grants from the State of the artiche tod how te 'ty orks MrNOrtegath them. He would provide a copy XIX. ADJOURNMENT With Council concurrence, Mayor Spiegel adjourned the e ti ghwaat 974:01 traffic p.m., noting that there would be a City Council Study Session regarding issues on Monday, April 12, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. in the Administrative Services Conference Room. ATTEST: RACHELLEPALM LASSEN, CITY CLERK CITYITYOFDESERT, CALIFORNIA OF PA P ROBERT A. SPIEGEL, MAYOR 41