Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrelim Minutes - City 06/23/2005PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2005 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Crites convened the meeting at 3:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Mayor Pro Tem Jim Ferguson Councilman Richard S. Kelly Councilman Robert A. Spiegel Mayor Buford A. Crites Also Present: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager/RDA Executive Director Robert W. Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, ACM for Community Services Homer Croy, ACM for Development Services Justin McCarthy, ACM for Redevelopment Stephen Y. Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Amir Hamidzadeh, Director of Building & Safety Philip Drell, Director of Community Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Duane K. Munson, Interim Director of Human Resources Michael J. Errante, Director of Public Works David Yrigoyen, Director of Redevelopment Robert P. Kohn, Director of Special Programs Ignacio Otero, Fire Chief, Palm Desert/Riverside County Fire Department/CDF Walt Holloway, Battalion Chief, Palm Desert/Riverside County Fire Dept./CDF David Avila, Fire Marshal, Palm Desert/Riverside County Fire Dept./CDF Rodney Vigue, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 III. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Request for Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): a) City of Palm Desert v. Van Alstine, Riverside County Superior Court Case No. INC 035579 Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b): Number of potential cases: 4 Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, Mayor Crites adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:03 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 4:00 p.m. IV. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION. None V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 9, 2005. Rec: Approve as presented. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 251, 252, 255, and 256. Rec: Approve as presented. C. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#540) by Linda Grant in the Amount of $1,000. Rec: By Minute Motion, reject the Claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. 2 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 D. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#549) by Joe Eustice in an Unspecified Amount. Rec: By Minute Motion, reject the Claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. E. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#550) by Karen Wilkinson in an Unspecified Amount. Rec: By Minute Motion, reject the Claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. F. COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. 1. Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting of May 11, 2005. 2. Youth Committee Meeting of May 3, 2005. Rec: Receive and file. G. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Nicholas Asbury — Youth Committee. Rec: Receive with very sincere regret. H. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Kayleigh Hyde — Youth Committee. Rec: Receive with very sincere regret. I. RESIGNATION from Michelle Stein — Youth Committee. Rec: Receive with very sincere regret. J. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Agreement for an Employee Assistance Program (E.A.P.) (Contract No. C23890). Rec: By Minute Motion, award the subject contract to The Valley Partnership at a rate of $2.00 per employee per month, beginning on July 1, 2005, and authorize the City Manager to execute same. 3 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Renewal Contract to Maintain the City's Membership in the Coachella Valley Employment Relations Consortium (Contract No. C21521). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve renewal of the subject contract with the firm of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW) to maintain the City's membership in the Coachella Valley Employment Relations Consortium, authorize the City Manager to sign the proposed contract with LCW, and authorize payment of the annual membership fee of $3,352 before August 1, 2005. L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Seventh Amendment to Lease Agreement with Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) for the Palm Desert Community Park at Palm Desert Middle School (Contract No. C16977). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to execute the subject Seventh Amendment to Lease Agreement. M. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Design of the Monterey Avenue Bridge Over the Whitewater Channel Expansion Joint Repair Project (Contract No. C23900, Project No. 643-05). Removed for separate consideration under Section VI I, Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for Council discussion and action. N. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION for Payment of Invoice for Emergency Plumbing Repair at Hidden Palms. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize reimbursement to Hidden Palms for payment of an invoice from Preferred Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning, Palm Springs, California, in the amount of $1,701.25 for emergency repair work during construction of the soundwall around the perimeter of Hidden Palms (Project No. 654-01) — funds are available in Account No. 400-4399-433-4001. O. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION of Contract for City Residential and Commercial Street Sweeping Services (Contract No. C22561). Removed for separate consideration under Section VI I, Consent Items Held Over. Please see that portion of the Minutes for Council discussion and action. 12 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 P. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION of Contract for Sweeping of City Parking Lots (Contract No. C22771). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Extend the contract with M & M Sweeping, Inc., Thousand Palms, California, for sweeping of President's Plaza East/West, President's Plaza III, and Entrada del Paseo parking lots in the amount of $9,384 per year ($782/month); 2) authorize the Mayor to execute same — funds are available in Account Nos. 277-4373-433-3091 , 282-4373-433-3091 , and 110-4310-433-3320 for the annual services. Q. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF BID for the Purchase of 36,400 Pounds of Roadsaver Low Tack Crack Seal Material. Rec: By Minute Motion, award the subject bid to Crafco, Inc., Chandler, Arizona, for the purchase of Crafco Roadsaver Low Tack crack seal material in the amount of $9,805.25, which includes tax and delivery — funds are available in 110-4250-433-2145. R. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Purchase of Fertilizer Supplies for Fiscal Year 2005/06. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the purchase of fertilizer supplies from Golf Ventures West, Bermuda Dunes, California, in the amount of $23,692 — funds are available in approved Landscape & Lighting District Accounts as well as General Fund Maintenance and Supplies Accounts. S. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Purchase of Irrigation Supplies for Fiscal Year 2005/06. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the purchase of irrigation supplies from United Green Mark, Inc., Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $8,095.74 — funds are available in approved Landscape & Lighting District Accounts as well as General Fund Maintenance and Supplies Accounts. T. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Services for Fiscal Year 2005/06. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve use of the following OEM vendors for FY 2005/06: 1) Palm Springs Motors; 2) Unicars Honda; 3) Crystal Chrysler; 4) Turf Star; 5) Torrence's Farm Implement; 6) Kelly 0 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Equipment; 7) Johnson Power Systems; 8) R.D.O. Equipment; 9) GCS Western Power & Equipment. U. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Vendor for General Fleet Repair Services. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the use of Hovley Tire, Palm Desert, California, for general fleet repair services that cannot be accomplished by the City's Mechanic, are not under a warranty, or are manufacturer -specific. V. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Supplier for General Aftermarket Automotive Parts, Tools, Equipment, and Services, As Needed, for Fleet Maintenance. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the use of NAPA Auto Parts, Palm Desert, California, to supply general aftermarket automotive parts, tools, equipment, and services, as needed, for fleet maintenance for FY 2005/06. W. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Use of Various Vendors for Various Services Provided to the City of Palm Desert. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve use of the following vendors for a variety of services provided to the City of Palm Desert: 1) A & S Automotive; 2) Parkhouse Tires; 3) K & C Mowers; 4) ICI Dulux Paint; 5) Tops N Barricades; 6) Desert Electric Supply; 7) Harv's Car Wash; 8) Anderson Communication; 9) Z Best Grinding; 10) Desert Environmental Services; 11) San Diego Rotary Broom; 12) AmeriGas; 13) American Industrial Supply; 14) Safety Kleen; 15) Sepulveda Building Materials; 16) HUB Construction Specialties; 17) Granite Construction. X. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Purchase L.E.D. Retrofit Kits for Illuminated Street Name Signs. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize purchase of L.E.D. retrofit kits for illuminated street name signs from various manufacturers to determine quality and authorize the purchase of the best kits in an amount not to exceed $35,000 — funds are available in the Traffic Signal Maintenance Account, No. 110-4250-433-3325. Y. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Energy Coalition Progress Report 7 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson asked that Item M be removed for separate consideration under Section VII, Consent Items Held Over. Councilman Spiegel asked that Item O also be removed for separate consideration. Upon motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by a 5-0 vote. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER M. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Design of the Monterey Avenue Bridge Over the Whitewater Channel Expansion Joint Repair Project (Contract No. C23900, Project No. 643-05). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson asked whether the cost of this project was being split with the City of Rancho Mirage. Public Works Director Michael Errante responded that the City of Rancho Mirage had not been approached about sharing the cost. He noted that concerns with the expansion joints were that they were excessive and wider than they should normally be. Staff was having them looked at to see if they can be retrofitted to close the gap. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract to Moffatt & Nichol, Irvine, California, in the amount of $19,948 and authorize a 10% contingency for the project; 2) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract — funds are available in Account No. 110-4300-433-3010. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. O. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION of Contract for City Residential and Commercial Street Sweeping Services (Contract No. C22561). Councilman Spiegel noted that at a recent Project Area 4 meeting, there were complaints from members that they did not feel their streets were being swept often enough. He said it had been his understanding that the sweeping was done weekly; however, he had been advised that it was done every two weeks, and he asked if that was correct. Mr. Errante confirmed that the streets were swept every two weeks, and he was not aware that it had ever been done weekly. Upon further question, he said staff could verify that the streets were being swept every two weeks on the days they were scheduled. In addition, staff could investigate to see how the streets look in between sweepings and possibly shorten that time. He 9 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 also noted an error in the staff report in that the $27.89 per curb mile reflected in the motion should actually be $27.97 per curb mile. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve a one-year extension of the subject contract with CleenStreet, Gardena, California, at the rate of $27.97 per curb mile; 2) authorize the Mayor to execute same — funds are available in the FY 2005/06 Budget, Account No. 110-4310-433-3320. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. VIII. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 05-50 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004/05 BUDGET TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE TRAFFIC SAFETY, GAS TAX, INTERNAL SERVICE, AND THE GENERAL FUND. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel relative to the notation in the staff report that "it is in the City's best interest to appropriate estimated unobligated balances from Traffic Safety, Gas Tax, Internal Service, and General Fund for reimbursement of eligible street expenditures and to transfer replacement cost to the City's Internal Service Fund," Mr. Gibson responded that the City was required to spend the funds each year; otherwise, the State might stop sending the funds to the City. He noted that the City did not know exactly how much funds will be received from the State during the year. At the end of the year, the accounts are adjusted to what was actually received, and that is what this resolution would do. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05-50. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. B. RESOLUTION NO. 05-51 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE NEW ADJUSTED RATE SCHEDULE OF FEES (EXHIBIT 5A) FOR THE COLLECTION, RECYCLING, AND DISPOSAL OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE AND RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL RECYCLING CONTAINED IN CONTRACT NO. C17230 — SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Councilman Spiegel asked what this would do to the amount charged to the average citizen of Palm Desert. Director of Special Programs Bob Kohn responded that residential rates would increase by approximately $.30 per 10 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 month. He noted that part of the recommended rate increase was tied to the automated recycling for walk-in service. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05-51. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. C. RESOLUTION NO. 05-52 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYOF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING AND ADOPTING LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (PUB. RESOURCES CODE §§ 21000 ET SEQ.) Mayor Crites noted that this was an internal staff document driven by changes in both court cases and legislation. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05-52. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. IX. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: None X. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ACTIONS TO RENOVATE THE LANDSCAPING FOR DESIGNATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY). Mr. Ortega briefly reviewed the staff report and noted that staff was available to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award a contract to Steven Burt & Associates, Inc., Bermuda Dunes, California, in the amount of $469,082 for Landscape and Lighting District Landscape Renovations (Contract No. C23040A, Project No. 936-04); 2) set aside a 10% contingency for the project in the amount of $46,908.20; 3) authorize 11 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 the Mayor to execute the agreement; 4) appropriate $271,433.80 to Fund 400 Capital Projects Reserves. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. Member Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize the transfer to Fund 400 Capital Projects Reserves of $55,324.50 from Project Area No. 1; $178,041.60 from Project Area No. 2; and $38,067.70 from Project Area No. 3; 2) appropriate $26,000 to Account No. 853-4388-433-4001 from Project Area No. 3 Unobligated Funds. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. B. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO A DECISION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION, DENYING A DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73-733 FRED WARING DRIVE, SUITE 108 Case No. SA 05-44 (CenterPointe Lending, Applicant/Appellant). Assistant Planner Ryan Stendell reviewed the staff report, noting that the Architectural Review Commission had approved two other deviations to the sign program for size and color. This applicant had allocated a location on the north side of the building facing Fred Waring Drive, just east of the midpoint of the building. The applicant did not feel the approved location had adequate visibility and was requesting a revised location at the east or west end of the building at the uppermost portion of the building nearest Fred Waring Drive. The Architectural Review Commission, after a site visit, determined that the approved location had proper visibility given the fact that the landscaping had been trimmed. The Commission further noted that the proposed new location looked cluttered on the stepped detail at both corners of the building and felt it was not an appropriate location for the sign. Upon question by Mayor Crites, Mr. Hargreaves responded that at its meeting of April 12, 2005, the Architectural Review Commission granted approval of size and color subject to staff finding appropriate location for the signage. If the location had not yet been agreed upon, it was his opinion that the entire matter of color, size, and location was at issue at this time if Council so desired. MR. SCOTT POLIMENI, President of CenterPointe Lending, 73-733 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, said he had moved his business to Palm Desert in May of 2005, believing that the chosen location offered certain benefits, including centrality in the Coachella Valley and visibility of signage from the street. His concern with the approved sign location was that it was behind some very mature trees. He noted that one of the regulations for the signage was that it could not exceed 20 feet in height; however, he said he had taken an abundance of photos of building signage within Palm Desert 12 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 that were higher than 20 feet. Another regulation was that only one signage was allowed per complex. However, he said he had pointed out to the Commission during its site visit that the Collier, Seeley, and Keith Companies had four each, and their signage far exceeded the square footage he was allowed. He added that the Architectural Review Commission felt giving him three approvals out of three requests (color, size, and location) would be a little too much and that he should be happy with the two concessions and eat the third. He showed renderings of the proposed location and disagreed with the Commission's comments that it looked distasteful and was not aesthetically correct. He asked for Council's approval of the signage. Upon question by Council, Mr. Stendell responded that the applicant was requesting approval of one sign at either the east or west facing wall on the top corner of the building. His approved location per the City's sign program was at approximately the middle of the building. This location did have some trees, but it appeared that the owner kept up with trimming the trees, and both staff and the Architectural Review Commission did not feel there was a problem with visibility. He added that the Commission had also discussed the possibility of the owner removing several of the trees. Upon question by Councilman Kelly, he said the Commission's objections to the location as requested by the application were that it was too high, it was not the appropriate location for a sign, and it looked cluttered on that upper corner. Councilmember Benson said she having the sign high on the building as requested by the applicant made it look like that was the name of the building itself. Councilman Kelly said he felt what the applicant was requesting would be a super location for him; however, there were other tenants in the building who would probably also like to have that location for a sign, and that probably would not be fair to those other tenants. Mr. Stendell noted that discussions were held relative to the location just below the Keith Companies sign while the Commission was on the site, and the applicant felt that was impeding on the Keith Companies signage and did not feel that was an appropriate location. Upon question by Councilman Kelly, he responded that the Keith Companies was a tenant and occupied a good portion of the building, which was why that company was allowed so many signs. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted that the City allows identification signage on buildings so that people can verify which building specific tenants are in. He 13 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 said these were not outdoor advertising displays for the general traveling public to advertise the business. He felt putting the sign on one side of the building would cut out 50% of the traveling public from being able to identify the building as belonging to that business. He said the Architectural Review Commission members had walked over to the building, took a look at it, and unanimously recommended denial of the applicant's request for signage location. He felt the applicant was confusing advertising with identification. Mr. Polimeni disagreed and said he felt signage was meant to be seen, and the allowed location meant his signage would be completely invisible. Councilmember Benson said it might be possible for the applicant to place his signage higher in the approved location under the window. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, affirm the action of the Architectural Review Commission dated May 10, 2005, denying the request for deviation from the approved sign program, but with the understanding that the Applicant's identification signage can be placed as high as possible in the approved location under the window. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. C. CONSIDERATION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE -RELATED SERVICES BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, AND A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RE- FORMING THE COVE COMMUNITIES SERVICES COMMISSION. Mr. Ortega reviewed the staff report, noting that with regard to fire inspection services, staff and the Fire Department had come to an agreement to continue the contract with the County of Riverside but to have the fire inspectors housed in the same area as City Building and Safety staff within the same office workspace. This would provide a single location for business owners or homeowners to arrange for fire and/or building inspections and would minimize duplication of effort and improve overall customer satisfaction. Staff would need to return to the City Council with a plan for providing space for this service. He noted other items for Council consideration, including a new cooperative agreement directly with the County of Riverside for provision of fire services, a joint powers agreement with the Cities of Rancho Mirage and Indian Wells to share in the cost of services, and approval of the County Fire budget included in Exhibit "A" of the staff report. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve adoption of the County Fire Budget in the Staff Report's Exhibit "A"; 2) approve the Cooperative Agreement to provide fire -related services between the County of Riverside and the City of Palm Desert, 14 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 and authorize the Mayor to execute same (Contract No. C23910); 3) approve the Joint Powers Agreement re-forming the Cove Communities Services Commission and authorize the Mayor to execute same (Contract No. C23920); 4) authorize continuance of fire inspection services through contract with County of Riverside with the following guidelines: a) Relocate County Fire Inspectors to work alongside City Building and Safety Staff within the same office workspace; b) designate a single point of contact for scheduling service requests, which would coordinate the fire inspection workload between both the County and City, ensuring both agencies receive information on existing projects and minimizing duplication of effort; c) consolidate any required business forms and require Fire Inspectors to wear less authoritative -looking uniforms and create a more business -friendly environment. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. 15 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, RIVERSIDE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM/LSSI, FOR LIBRARY SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2007. Councilman Spiegel stated it was his understanding that College of the Desert would be providing additional hours for its side of the Library. Ms. Klassen responded that the College side of the Library would be open during the summer from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Thursday, although it was not able to provide this service during the summer in years past. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve Contract No. C14167 - Additional Staff for the Event and Volunteer Coordinator positions and a part-time Computer Instructor/Lab Technician; 2) approve Contract No. C18024 - Additional Hours/Bookmobile for the there additional hours of operation of the Palm Desert Wing of the Multi -Agency Library each Thursday and operation of Bookmobile Service for Palm Desert; 3) authorize the Mayor to execute said contracts; 4) authorize issuance of a City Purchase Order, favoring Library Systems & Services, Inc. (LSSI), Germantown, Maryland, in the amount of $55,000 for materials in FY 2005/06 — all funding for the above has been set aside in the FY 2005/06 Budget in Account No. 452-4662-454-4001; services in FY 2006/07 will be considered through the established process and subject to approval at the appropriate time. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. E. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE NORTH CARPORT PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM (CONTRACT NO. C23290C). Councilman Spiegel asked how much money had been saved by having the existing photovoltaic cells over the main parking structure. Mr. Kohn responded that the City had saved approximately $7,000. He said the existing system was very small (4.6 kW), and the proposed north carport system was considerably larger (56kW),which should save approximately $20,000 per year. He added that the City had a loan from the California Energy Commission for $197,000, and approximately half of that money would come back to the City through incentives from the Solar Incentive Program. Upon question by Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson, Mr. Kohn responded that this program was approved by the California Energy Commission. The program has to amortize itself within a ten-year period; because the solar panels will last for approximately 25 years, he said the City would be on the plus side for approximately 15 years. 16 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Councilman Kelly asked if staff could do a chart of the power bills for the City Hall complex over the past ten years. Mr. Kohn responded that the City subscribed to the "Bill Manager" system, and he was able to go back three years and print a history report that shows electric usage in 15-minute increments. He added that this would be done on a regular basis to monitor the lighting retrofit that had just been done. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject contract to REVCO Solar Engineering, Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $334,545, authorize a 10% contingency in the amount of $3,344.54, and appropriate funds from Fund 400 for this purpose; 2) authorize the Mayor to execute said contract documents. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. F. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE 2005 CITYWIDE RESURFACING PROGRAM (CONTRACT NO. C23820, PROJECT NO. 752-05). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, award the subject contract to Yeager Skanska„ Inc., Riverside, California, in the amount of $942,615, authorize the Mayor to execute same, and authorize a 10% contingency for the project — funds are available in Account No. 110-4311-433-3320. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ESTIMATES AND AWARD OF BID TO RENOVATE THE KITCHEN AT PALM DESERT FIRE STATION NO. 33 (CONTRACT NO. C23860A-C). Mr. Ortega reviewed the staff report and recommendations. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve award of bid to Pacific Sales, Rancho Mirage, California, in the amount of $14,755.29 for new kitchen appliances for Fire Station No. 33; 2) approve award of bid to Mastercraft Kitchens, Palm Springs, California, in the amount of $25,976 for new kitchen cabinetry for Fire Station No. 33; 3) approve award of bid to Gurzi Construction, La Quinta/Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $17,251 for general construction services for Fire Station No. 33; 4) appropriate $57,982.29 from Account No. 231-4220-422-4001 for this project. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. 17 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING J U N E 23, 2005 H. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT TO PROVIDE BENCHMARK LEVELING AND A PRECISE CITYWIDE GPS SURVEY (CONTRACT NO. C23930). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, award the subject contract to Psomas, Riverside, California, in the amount of $59,830 and authorize the Mayor to execute same, and authorize a 10% contingency for the services — funds are available in Account No. 110-4300-413-3010. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES — CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AREA NO. 5 (CONTRACT NO. C20992, PROJECT NO. 905-XX). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, approve extension of the subject contract with Steven Burt & Associates, Bermuda Dunes, California, in the amount of $184,919.48 for FY 2005/06 — funds are available in Park Maintenance and Office Complex Maintenance Accounts. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. J. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES — CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AREA NO. 4 (CONTRACT NO. C22861, PROJECT NO. 904-XX). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, approve extension of the subject contract with Steven Burt & Associates, Bermuda Dunes, California, in the amount of $152,952.30 for FY 2005/06 — funds are available in Park Maintenance Account No. 110-4611-453-3370. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR ADVERTISING SERVICES FOR EL PASEO BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (CONTRACT NO. C21052). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve Amendment No. 2 to the subject contract between the City of Palm Desert and Creative i Group, Inc., Palm Desert, California, extending the contract from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006, in an amount not to exceed $220,000. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. im PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 L. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE SAMSUNG WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LPGA GOLF TOURNAMENT AT BIGHORN GOLF CLUB, OCTOBER 10 - 16, 2005. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report as well as the recommendation from the City's Marketing Committee. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, concur with the Marketing Committee's recommendation to sponsor BIGHORN Golf Club's Samsung World Championship LPGA Golf Tournament in the amount of $137,500. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. M. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE PALM SPRINGS INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL, JANUARY 5 - 16, 2006. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation from the Marketing Committee as well as a subsequent report and an amended proposal from the Palm Springs International Film Festival. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson referred to the supplemental report with the amended proposal and asked if staff had a recommendation. Mrs. Gilligan responded that staff did not offer a recommendation and was looking for direction from the Council. The recommendation of the Marketing Committee was to deny the request for sponsorship; however, it would be up to the City Council to determine whether to look at the request from an educational, cultural, good neighbor policy. MR. EARL GREENBURG, Chairman of the Board of the Palm Springs International Film Festival, thanked the City for its past support of the Festival, which he felt was critical in helping the Festival to mount what he considered a total community event. He said he had met in the last several months with several members of Council and the Marketing Committee to review the Festival's activities and confirm that they had completed the agreement with the City for last year's event. He agreed there were items in the agreement that they could probably have managed a little better; however, he felt overall they had done a competent job with the staff and volunteers who helped with the Festival. He said this was the most successful Film Festival in its history, and it was now ranked #1 and #2 of the 650 festivals that exist throughout the United States. He felt Palm Desert stood in the forefront of all the cities in the Valley with its generous support of last year's Festival. He noted the packets of information he had submitted 19 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 to the Council, which included new initiatives for the coming year. In light of the fact that Palm Desert had always been in the forefront of supporting activities of other organizations throughout the Valley as a good citizen, good neighbor, and sometimes as a branding effort on behalf of the entire Valley, he said he had decided to incorporate in this year's presentation something which was wholly unorthodox for this Festival but was something he felt the City of Palm Desert deserved. During the actual Festival this year, he said they would break tradition and conduct the "Best of the Fest" event, a compilation of the finest films shown during the Festival. Those films would be presented here in the City of Palm Desert to be shared by residents of Palm Desert along with other residents living in this part of the Valley. It would be an all -day event, held at the Palm d'Or Theatres, with films running all day in all of the theaters. In addition would be all of the items in the proposal from last year, coupled with some educational initiatives. He said he had discussed with members of the Council the desire for Festival staff to get into the educational arena in a much more significant manner, and they were working with faculty members from the UCR-Palm Desert and hoped to have a program established some time in the next 90- 120 days. He said they had made contact with the McCallum Theatre and Mr. Giatas, and they hoped to participate aggressively in next summer's program. He said they were looking at the feasibility of incorporating the opportunity to show films at a cost that would be acceptable to everyone at the McCallum Theatre, and they proposed to do free Festival screenings as they did exclusively for Palm Desert residents last Festival. He added that they were also hoping to create a whole tour program for people who would be coming to hotels in Palm Desert. After meeting with the Marketing Committee, he felt this was a critical component in helping the marketing goals of the City. He said they were planning on December 3d to make the announcement of the honorees at Tiffany's in Palm Desert, followed that evening by what they hoped would be a presentation and honor to the Frederick R. Lowe winner, the musical composer award, at the McCallum Theatre with the Indian Wells Symphony. He added that these were all proposals on their agenda and were in the works. They were not subject to the City of Palm Desert joining them this coming year, but there was anticipation that Palm Desert would once again consider being a presenting sponsor at this year's Festival. He offered to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel stated that it was his understanding Mr. Greenburg had met with Terry Green and Ken Walters at UCR, and he asked what kind of program Mr. Greenburg was planning on developing with UCR. Mr. Greenburg responded that the program would be to create a specific film curriculum which would be for students in the Master's of Fine Arts program. 20 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 He said the Festival's Executive Director and Programs Director had engaged in several meetings with Mr. Green and could better discuss the details of the program. He felt the only way to attract the film industry and film participation in the Valley was by providing educational programs in that film arena. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said it was his understanding that Mr. Greenburg had gone to his Executive Committee and asked to have basically a premier event for the Film Festival, during the Film Festival, in Palm Desert, and the Committee approved it. Mr. Greenburg agreed. Councilmember Benson said Palm Desert had always tried to be in the forefront in supporting these types of events and had done so in many years when other cities could not afford to provide support, hoping that the other cities would follow in Palm Desert's footsteps when they could afford it. She asked whether other cities in the Valley had approved funding for the Festival. Mr. Greenburg responded that he had a commitment from Indian Wells and was currently working with the Cities of Rancho Mirage, La Quinta, Indio, and Desert Hot Springs. Upon question by Mayor Crites relative to the "Best of the Fest", Mr. Greenburg responded that the event would be held simultaneously in Palm Desert and Palm Springs. He noted that 300-400 people were turned away during the "Best of the Fest" event this past year, and many of those people were already Platinum ticket holders, holding tickets which entitle them to come to the films. Rather than double up theaters in Palm Springs, this seemed like a good opportunity to do something rather dramatic in this part of the Valley. Mayor Crites asked when Mr. Greenburg expected to complete discussions with the McCallum Theatre. Mr. Greenburg responded that he had made it clear to Mr. Giatas that the Festival would participate next year during the summer in the educational program; what they were hoping to do was to find some other opportunities that could be done during the normal school year for students. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson asked how much of the proposal submitted to Council had actually been presented to the Marketing Committee and whether the "Best of the Fest" had been included. 21 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Mr. Greenburg responded that the "Best of the Fest" had not been included. He said when he met with the Marketing Committee, it was basically to review last year's proposal and the elements of that proposal. The Committee had concerns dealing with bringing additional traffic into the City of Palm Desert, which was not part of last year's proposal. He said while he was not surprised, he did come to realize that it was a component that needed to be included this year. That resulted in submittal of this new proposal to the City Council. Mrs. Gilligan added that the Marketing Committee met on Tuesday and did receive a copy of this proposal. The Committee agreed with its original position that it was not marketing dollars; however, Committee members had no objection to the City participating. Upon question by Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson as to staff's opinion, she stated that, based on the additional proposal, the "Best of the Fest", cooperating with UCR, working with the McCallum, etc., staff would recommend that the Council approve sponsorship for a second year from the Special Events budget rather than Marketing. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated that this program was not included in the new budget; he suggested setting funds aside to consider it in the future and let Mr. Greenburg firm up some of the commitments (McCallum Theatre, other cities in the Valley, etc.). Councilman Kelly suggested that staff and the Marketing Committee be included in this further study of the proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson agreed and said he felt a recommendation should be made to the City Council for final consideration. Councilman Spiegel said the Marketing Committee was not overly enthusiastic about sponsoring the event this year because members felt the results of last year's Festival were not that important to the City of Palm Desert. However, he felt Mr. Greenburg had now gone above and beyond, particularly with UCR, and he felt the proposed program could be a tremendous asset to the schools and to the City of Palm Desert as a whole. He said he was ready to approve City sponsorship in the amount of $50,000 for the 2006 Film Festival based on the proposal as outlined by Mr. Greenburg. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the $50,000 sponsorship request from the Palm Springs International Film Festival, January 5 - 16, 2006. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and FAILED by a 2-3 vote, with Councilman Kelly, Councilmember Benson, and Mayor Crites voting NO. 22 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 23 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize setting funds aside in the amount of $50,000 for sponsorship of the 2006 Palm Springs International Film Festival, subject to staff's and Marketing Committee's further study of a complete proposal to be submitted by the organization and returning it with a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 4-1 vote, with Councilman Kelly voting NO. XI. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. ORDINANCE NO. 1094 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 8 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, ADDING CHAPTER 8.19 RELATIVE TO MANDATORY AUTOMATED COLLECTION OF SOLID WASTE, RECYCLING, AND GREENWASTE FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT (Continued from the meetings of April 14, and May 12, 2005). Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets, noting that this matter had been continued to allow Waste Management an opportunity to review the costs. That review had been done, and staff's recommendation was that Council pass the ordinance to second reading. Councilman Kelly moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1094 to second reading. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. With City Council concurrence, Mayor Crites suspended the agenda at this point in order to introduce Sister Cities Committee Member Donna Jean Darby and visitors from Palm Desert's Sister Cities — two from Gisborne, New Zealand, and four from Ixtapa - Zihuatanejo, Mexico — who were participating in the McCallum Theatre's Institute for Aesthetic Education in Palm Desert this week. B. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM MONUMENTATION DEPOSIT FUND AND AWARD A CONTRACT FOR MONUMENTATION AND DOCUMENTATION SERVICES (Continued from the meeting of April 28, 2005). Mr. Errante stated that staff was requesting that Council continue this matter to a date uncertain Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this matter to a date uncertain. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. 24 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 C. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES — CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AREA NO. 1 (CONTRACT NO. C23600, PROJECT NO. 901-XX) (Continued from the meetings of May 26, and June 9, 2005). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Reject all bids from the May 3, 2005, Bid Opening for Landscape Maintenance Area No. 1; 2) authorize the City Clerk to re -advertise and call for bids for Landscape Maintenance Services — Consolidated Landscape Maintenance Area No. 1. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. MR. ZEKE GARZA, Garza Landscaping, Inc., 74-345 Buttonwood Drive, Palm Desert, said he had previously addressed Council relative to Consolidated Landscape Maintenance Area Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6. He said he was the low bidder on two of those areas (Nos. 1 and 3) and was the second lowest on Area No. 2 and was disqualified on a technicality for not providing the name of the pest control service at time of the bid opening. He felt he was not required to provide this information per the bid instructions and should have been awarded those contracts. He questioned how the sealed bid process for these re -advertised contracts would be fair, since the contract prices had already been disclosed on the existing bids. He asked that the Council reconsider its action, accept the existing bids, and award the contracts according to their merit. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted that the Council had directed staff and the City Attorney to meet with Mr. Garza to review this matter. He asked whether the City Attorney concurred with the action taken by Council relative to the contracts. Mr. Hargreaves responded that he concurred with the recommendations of staff that the documents were ambiguous, which led to confusion. While this was an unfortunate situation, he felt the only way to remedy it in this case was to re -bid the contracts. He noted that, technically, Mr. Garza was not disqualified; his bid was rejected as being non -responsive. With the re -bid process, everyone would understand the ground rules this time, and the bids would be responsive. Upon further question by Mr. Garza, Mr. Croy responded that the contract for Consolidated Landscape Maintenance Area No. 3 was awarded at a previous City Council meeting and would not be re -bid. Mayor Crites noted that Mr. Garza was welcome to discuss this with the City Attorney if he so desired. 25 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 26 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 D. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES — CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AREA NO. 2 (CONTRACT NO. C23610, PROJECT NO. 902-XX) (Continued from the meetings of May 26, and June 9, 2005). Please see discussion under Continued Business Item C above. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Reject all bids from the May 3, 2005, Bid Opening for Landscape Maintenance Area No. 2 ; 2) authorize the City Clerk to re -advertise and call for bids for Landscape Maintenance Services — Consolidated Landscape Maintenance Area No. 2. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. E. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES — CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AREA NO. 6 (CONTRACT NO. C23630, PROJECT NO. 906-XX) (Continued from the meetings of May 26, and June 9, 2005). Please see discussion under Continued Business Item C above. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Reject all bids from the May 3, 2005, Bid Opening for Landscape Maintenance Area No. 6; 2) authorize the City Clerk to re -advertise and call for bids for Landscape Maintenance Services — Consolidated Landscape Maintenance Area No. 6. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. F. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH INTERIM DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES (CONTRACT NO. C23020) (Continued from the meeting of June 9, 2005). Mr. Ortega stated that staff's recommendation was to continue this matter to the meeting of July 14, 2005. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this matter to the City Council meeting of July 14, 2005. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. 27 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 G. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF LANDSCAPED MEDIANS ON PORTOLA AVENUE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF WASHINGTON CHARTER SCHOOL (CONTRACT NO. C23870) (Continued from the meeting of June 9, 2005). Mr. Errante asked that Council continue this item until such time as staff has an opportunity to meet with the School Board on June 301n Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this matter to the meeting of July 14, 2005. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XII. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. C22800 — CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT OF THE CIVIC CENTER PARK IRRIGATION PUMP STATION (PROJECT NO. 720-01). Note: Items A and B were considered together. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel as to how much money has been spent thus far on this pump station, Mr. Errante responded that the original contract amount was $792,000 for the construction and $49,000 for construction management. Items A and B would add another $71,000 for construction and $36,000 for construction management. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve Contract Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $36,000 to the subject contract with Harris & Associates, Palm Desert, California, and authorize the Mayor to execute same — funds are available in Account No. 400-4674-454-4001. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. C23090 — CONSTRUCTION OF THE CIVIC CENTER PARK PUMP STATION (PROJECT NO. 720-01). Please see discussion under Continued Business Item A above. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $71,509.49 to the subject contract with Cora Constructors, Palm Desert, California, and authorize the Mayor to execute same; 2) authorize the transfer of said funds from contingency to base for the subject project. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. m PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 C. REPORT ON THE FINDINGS OF A SOUND STUDY CONDUCTED ALONG TAMARISK ROW DRIVE ADJACENT TO THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD. Mayor Crites noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. MR. HELMUT LIHS, 76-821 Ascot Circle, Palm Desert, read his prepared statement (on file and of record in the City Clerk's Office). MR. ARTHUR COLTER, resident of Palm Valley Country Club, said the measurement locations for this sound study did not include any locations within Palm Valley Country Club, even though they were located along the same corridor and suffered the same extreme noise conditions as the locations cited in the report. He said the normally unacceptable range was 70-75 dba's, and the Environmental Protection Agency standard for interstate commerce on highways ranged from 81 to 93 decibels. He said unless there is a lot of attenuation between the freeway and Palm Valley's location, they were well above the normally unacceptable range based upon EPA approval standards. With regard to trains, the approval standard was for 88 decibels at speeds of 45 mph or less, 93 decibels at speeds greater than 45 mph, and that did not include whistles. He noted that staff report indicated that the study used a 24-hour average; however, the noise for Palm Valley residents at night was much worse than anytime during the day. He asked that the Council consider a strenuous effort to provide relief to the residents from this situation. Mayor Crites stated that the center of this noise issue was who fixes and puts in a sound wall. He said as one member of the Council, he would do everything he could to work with the Railroad and Caltrans in terms of sound walls and mitigation; however, the City did not build the railroad, the freeway, or any of the things that create the situation in that area, and he did not think it was the City's responsibility to build a sound wall. He said the City could do everything it could to try and work to get the agencies that created the problem to fix the problem, but it was not a problem the City created. Councilmember Benson agreed. Mayor Crites noted that the Railroad wanted to double -track, which would create more noise and may create the legal opportunity to require noise abatement. In addition, it was his understanding that Caltrans had plans to expand the freeway, which would create another potential legal nexus for requiring that. 29 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Councilman Kelly said there was a proposal to add a lane to the freeway some time in the future, and that might well be a time when something could be accomplished as far as mitigating the noise. He noted that if people purchase homes adjacent to an existing freeway, they have no legal solution to cause the building of a sound wall. If the freeway is built after the houses are there, the builders would have a legal obligation to do something to mitigate the noise. If a lane is added to the freeway, there would be an opportunity to require a sound wall. Mr. Lihs said the residents fully understood the situation and were not asking the City of Palm Desert to take care of the problem. He said he had done a lot of research and found there is help available from the Federal Government, the Railroad, the State, etc. They were asking that the City spearhead the drive for residents to obtain relief. Mayor Crites moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize staff to contact the Federal Railroad Administration and seek a "Quiet Zone" designation for this area, thus limiting the use of locomotive horns; 2) authorize staff to forward the study by Medlin & Associates to the Union Pacific Railroad and seek consideration and assistance to mitigate noise levels in this area through installation of a berm and wall, with additional direction that the City Manager prepare documentation regarding items that the City can assist with in order to make sure both the Railroad and Caltrans are held responsible for any new projects they undertake that create noise and what measures can be applied to abate that issue for residents of the area. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. A recess was observed 5:50 p.m. - 5:53 p.m. With Council concurrence, the remainder of the Agenda was suspended at this point in order to consider Section XIII, Public Hearings, Item B. Please see that portion of the Minutes for Council discussion and action. D. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CORPORATION YARD EXPANSION (CONTRACT NO. C19250A, PROJECT NO. 715-00). Mr. Ortega noted the original and supplemental staff reports in the packets. He said the report indicated that the low bid was substantially over the amount the City budgeted for the project. He noted that if the Council wished to award the bid anyway, only General Funds could be utilized, as the project was bid as a non -prevailing wage contract. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, Mr. Ortega said there were several items which were very important for the Corporation Yard to have, including water clarifier, 30 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 covered shade structure, road materials storage area, additional office space, etc. Councilman Kelly said he felt this was an important project, and if additional funds need to be appropriated, Council should approve it so the project can proceed. Mayor Crites said he would not want to delay a project based on the hope that construction prices would come down; however, if rebidding the project would bring the price down from $5.1 million, that might be a different story. Upon additional question by Councilman Spiegel, Mr. Ortega said he would recommend that Council appropriate additional funds for this project for a total of $6 million. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Reject the bid submitted by Davis Reed, Encinitas, California, as non -responsive; 2) award a contract for construction of the Corporation Yard Expansion to WDL Construction, Inc., Palm Desert, California, in the amount of $5,211,904; 3) appropriate funds to make up the difference between the amount budgeted and $6,000,000 for the purpose of carrying out this project. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. E. REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SCOPE OF WORK AND COST ESTIMATES FOR THE CIVIC CENTER PARKAMPHITHEATER REMODEL. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets, noting that Council had previously instructed staff to find out whether the original bidders for this project would honor their bids submitted last summer; not all were willing to do so. Rather than directing staff to rebid the project, he recommended that the project and its intended objectives be reevaluated, with a report to be brought back to City Council for consideration. Councilman Spiegel said it was his understanding that there was also a concern with the heat coming off the structure during the summer months. Councilmember Benson said she felt something needed to be done to get this project completed. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, refer the project back to a subcommittee of Councilmembers Benson and Spiegel and appropriate staff to re-evaluate the project and its intended objectives. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. 31 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 32 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 F. REPORT ON DINAH SHORE DRIVE. Mr. Errante noted that the street width on Dinah Shore Drive between 351h and Portola was currently being designed at four lanes, and staff recommended that it be increased to six lanes. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize an increase of the street width on Dinah Shore Drive from four to six lanes between 351h and Portola, and for the design engineer to proceed accordingly with completion of said design. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE CITY MANAGER'S AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S PROPOSED FINANCIAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/06 (JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE PALM DESERT HOUSING AUTHORITY). 1) waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 05-47, adopting a City Program and Financial Plan for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006; 2) waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 05-48, establishing the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2005/06; 3) waive further reading and adopt Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. 503, adopting a Redevelopment Agency Program and Financial Plan for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006; 4) waive further reading and adopt Housing Authority Resolution No. HA-27, adopting a Housing Authority Program and Financial Plan for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006; 5) by Minute Motion, approve revised attorney services' hourly rate for Best, Best & Krieger and for Richards, Watson & Gershon, as proposed by the two firms; 6) waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 05-49, setting the Salary Schedule, Salary Ranges, and Allocated Classifications for FY 2005/06; 7) by Minute Motion, approve Out -of -State Travel as listed on the accompanying memo. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. 33 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING J U N E 23, 2005 B. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL TO A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROVING A PARCEL MAP TO ESTABLISH A ONE -LOT SUBDIVISION WITH A CONDOMINIUM OVERLAY AT THE 191-SPACE INDIAN SPRINGS MOBILE HOME PARK LOCATED AT 49-305 HIGHWAY 74 (APN 652-120-007) Case No. PM 31862 (Indian Springs, Ltd., Applicant/Appellant) (Continued from the meetings of February 10, March 24, May 12, and May 26, 2005). The following is a verbatim transcript of this portion of the meeting. Key BAC Mayor Buford A. Crites CLO Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager RAS Councilman Robert A. Spiegel BH Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney SL Sue Loftin MS Mari Schmidt JK James Kirwan NS Norm Stack JF Mayor Pro Tem Jim Ferguson RC Richard Close SS Steve Smith, Planning Manager RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk BAC That brings us to Item B, consideration of an appeal to a decision of the Planning Commission having to do with a parcel map on the Indian Springs Mobile Home Park. Mr. City Manager ... and I'd ask that those who are out in the lobby either chat outside or sit in the cool inside and be quiet. Okay ... Mr. City Manager, this is a public hearing. Do you wish to offer a staff report before we go to a public hearing? CLO Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, this is an item that has been before the Council on a couple of occasions. It involves around a couple of conditions regarding the conversion. (momentary high-pitched noise from the audio system) RAS That's a good way to clear the room. CLO The City Attorney is prepared to make a recommendation so that Council can move forward on this item. 34 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 BAC Okay. BH I think it would be appropriate at this point if we heard the testimony of the applicant and the residents... and then based on what we've heard, discuss what our various options are. You have the previous staff reports... suggest several conditions... we also have a ... essentially a settlement proposal with respect to conditions that has been put together over the last several days. So there are several different options in terms of ways to go, but I think it would be appropriate to hear from both the applicant and the residents and then decide on a direction. BAC Okay. Does the applicant have comment at this point? The appellant. SL I'm not... it's Sue Loftin, 5760 Fleet Street, Carlsbad, California, talking on behalf of the applicant. Your City Attorney discombobulated me a little. I'm used to having conditions to talk about, so ... and in view of the fact that we don't have specific conditions, for the record we request a decision tonight. We do not agree to waive time, and we object to any continuance. We incorporate all of our prior testimony, correspondence, and documents into the record. We would request that the Planning Commission approval be adopted without condition #5. We object to all other new conditions as presented in the last staff report as violating Government Code 66428.1(d), 66427.5, Health and Safety Codes 18100 Et Seq, 18500 Et Seq, 18550 Et Seq, and the Code of Regulations implementing those, and Business and Professions Code 11000 Et Seq. We will ... the applicant would agree to the terms of the May 41h letter, which we went over at the last hearing, but to remind everyone, the City would provide funding. That funding would be a grant from ... for the low and moderate income households; however, the deal ends up being structured. The cost incurred by the owner would not be passed on in the form of rent increases to the resident households that select to continue renting. The owner would grant tenants of the park a one-time 90-day option to purchase. The amount of the grant ... well, we already... would average for the low and moderate income people about twenty thousand. The owner would provide the low income residents $5,000 grant for those who qualify. The owner would provide a rent deferral program for moderate income residents. In the event of a delay of (unclear) funding, the prices would be held for a reasonable period of time. The owner would grant public easements within the park necessary for the construction, installation, and maintenance of the project. The sewer system would be owned by the appropriate governmental agency. Condition #10, the owner had requested the Redevelopment Agency to be responsible for the project. The City has flatly declined. The Water District has flatly declined, so I guess that leaves that to the owner, but our preference would be that someone else would handle that. We talked today ... well actually, yesterday, this morning, lunch time, and there were some modifications on this. I... in speaking to the City Attorney before the hearing, he said there were a lot of proposals, he didn't know what was going to be done, so I don't know quite how 35 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 to address that, but the owner would accept as conditions those conditions set forth on the May 41h letter. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have at this time or be available after you hear public testimony. BAC Thank you. Are there those in the audience who wish to offer comment at this point? Yes, ma'am. MS Good evening. I tell you what ... I saw ... I've been here for a couple of hours, and you've been handing out all this money. So I would like you to buy my lot in Indian Springs. I don't know how much it's going to be, but you could set aside the money and then when we know, maybe you could help us out. Just being funny, of course. My name is Mari Schmidt. I'm a resident and coach owner in Indian Springs Mobile Home Park. I speak to you personally as well as being President of the Homeowners Association. It is always an extremely sobering thought to realize that the future of what will happen to each of our approximately 250 residents depends on the decisions of only four people. Even Councilwoman Benson, although she will not vote on this issue, will be affected, as she is and has been a long-time resident of Indian Springs. I frequently focus on what is happening in Eldorado Estates in Palm Springs. We should all know that Indian Springs and Eldorado share the same park owners. The last time I visited Eldorado, I was disheartened to see the multitude of vacant spaces there where the coaches have been removed. stopped counting at 48 "for sales", but the worst of it was the 12-plus units/coaches that were separated down the middle by a foot or so gap, some listing to one side. Yellow caution tape is all over the place. My fear is that the same will happen at Indian Springs. As there is an entire spectrum of eventualities that can befall us all down the road, if this conversion process is not handled well, I'd appreciate your indulgence in allowing me to enter into the permanent record of this proceeding the following comments, which I feel are critical to your deliberations. Hardship rent increases... several of the proposals that the park owners have presented to the City in which the City might provide some form of funding for the sewer work include a stipulation restraining hardship rent increase applications. My concern is that whatever agreements are entered into, with the park owners specifically, spell out the prohibition of all possible hardship rent increases, notjust those limited to the sewer issue. Sewer installation ... it seems that some subdividers have been allowed several years to address similar sewer installations. If the conversion has taken place in the meantime, is there some authority that oversees and guarantees that installation? Or what happens if the land owner withdraws the conversion application after the City has sent it on to the State DRE? Lawsuits... is it not a shame that almost everything today has to go to the courts to be resolved? And is it not a shame that senior citizens who have worked hard all their lives and simply need a safe place to live are forced to take action, hire counsel, and have their quiet enjoyment shattered, let alone their economic stability disrupted? There has always... already been economic upheaval with some of our 36 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 very old seniors. In studying what happened in the Eldorado situation, we see that as the value of the land increases, the value of the coach decreases. So if one chooses to continue renting and has to leave for one reason or another prior to buying, the coach becomes ultimately worthless. Hence, most of all the proceeds for the sale of that lot and coach go to the park owner, leaving the coach owner relatively little return on their investment. This certainly constitutes an economic hardship on the resident. Residents are responsible for the costs of changing over from septics as well as the installation costs of the sewers. There is some presumption on the part of the park owner's legal representatives and others that the cost of hooking up to the sewer should be borne by the residents of the park, passed through, etc. I'm not sure where this concept is written, but I do know, if you all talk about it long enough, people will begin to believe it. Wouldn't it be a shame if this were to go to the courts for resolution? Think of what would have to be proven. Typically, the entire concept is based on fair return of investment. In order to substantiate the hardship and, therefore, the unfair return on the park owner's investment, a number of events might occur in any litigation process. First, all the park owner's records would have to be produced and substantiated. For instance, the record of original purchase; how much; the issue surrounding continuing hardship rent increases that have been granted over the years, which perhaps should have sunsetted by now but are continuing; the number of loans that have been placed against the property over the years, the proceeds of which have not been allocated to the park; the windfall capture of rent proceeds associated with the five-year lease saga, which existed in 1992 and subsequent years; the existing multi -million -dollar loan against the property executed in recent years, why was it necessary and where did that money go. Secondly, there have been relatively few space vacancies since the park was purchased by the present park owner. There has been little loss of rents over the years. Hardship increases and fair return investment are indeed defined in the eyes of the beholder. These are only a few of things that would more than likely surface and have to be resolved in any litigation. It would take years to finalize, tie up the conversion, and perpetuate the unrest that prevails among the park residents. No one wants to see that happen. There is one final thing I would ask of Council. Whatever testimony, paperwork, letters, the like, should be included in the permanent record of these proceedings and should be forwarded with any approval documentation of the conversion application sent to the State Department of Real Estate for their consideration and information. We need your support. We are counting on all of you to place the full force and power of this city into action to make sure this conversion is done lawfully and fairly, whatever it takes. Please let me thank you on behalf of all of us for all your time and effort that you have put in to this on our behalf. It is not an easy assignment. Thank you. Any questions? BAC Thank you. Any questions at this point? No. Any other comments? 37 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 JK Good evening. My name is James Kirwan, #160, resident of Indian Springs Mobile Home Park. This evening I am speaking to you as the acting chairman of our conversion committee, which is a group of residents who gather who help to look over some of the paperwork and all that our homeowners association is considering. And my comments to you this evening are, as Mari said, in hopes that the concerns of the citizens of .... residents of Indian Springs will be put into the public record, not so much that we have anything that you can particularly act upon, such as our legal descriptions in the CC&R's and those things, but to express our concern over the ...what we find confusing in the CC&R's as to the description of what is actually being offered to us. There are various terms that seem to be contradictory in the CC&R's, those ... that term being exclusive use area and common area and space. And at one point it appears that we are buying just the space below our unit and that there are areas around our unit which have been staked out which appear ... which are referred to as exclusive use areas. We are not purchasing that, but we have the exclusive use of that, yet later on in the CC&R's it refers to the ownership wiII... manufactured home spaces ... the ownership of each condominium shall include the manufactured home space and exclusive use area and such undivided interest in the common area. That would make it appear that we are buying the exclusive use area. Now is that important? Yes, it is because it's going to ... the cost of the lot would be greatly affected. Are they going to charge us for the exclusive use area and call it a common area? You see, these concerns have to be put in terms that we can understand. The escrow period was addressed in the last meeting by the chairman of our conversion committee. 90-day escrow, starting when and ending when? Is it an open-end escrow? What are the conditions? These are situations that we hope that ... will be addressed by the appropriate people, whether that be you or that be the California Department of Real Estate. The ... I think we've pretty well concluded that the septic tanks are not only antiquated, they are ... we have discovered through searching the records of the California Water Quality Control Board that over the past ten years, there have been innumerable violations and citations issued and that our septic tank system is antiquated and not functioning properly. It's not cleaned out the way it should be, it's not installed the way it should be. So with those comments in mind, would ... just to reiterate that we, the residents, feel that we are powerless to act on any of these considerations. We hope that you or someone down the line or up the line will take those into consideration ... that this ... we feel that we are being, what's the expression, waved in the breeze, so to speak and ... we trust in your good judgment. Thank you very much. RAS Could I ask you a question? JK Yes, sir. m PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 RAS Have you taken your concerns to the park owner as far as ... is it the land strictly under your pad or is it an area around it? What's included? JK I addressed this in our one meeting we had with Ms. Loftin. I did express my concern to her, and she said she would look into it. I think in this situation it would require legal ... we need some legal advice on this to really... there's no map. We haven't seen the map. We haven't seen anything laid out. Are we going by a metes and bounds description, or are we going by a plat map description? We don't know, and it will affect the cost of our lot, and it will affect... therefore, affect our financing. RAS I'm sure that it will. BAC Okay, thank you. Are there others who wish to offer comment at this point? NS My name's Norm Stack, and I live at 166 Indian Springs, and I'll make this very short. I know there's lots and lots of questions for all parties and for the Council, but I can answer one big question for you. The reason he's putting all of us through this is so he can beat the rent control and raise the rent. I just wanted to leave you with that. BAC Thank you, sir. There being no one else, then I will close the ... you may have a brief moment, yes, if you so need. SL Just ... Sue Loftin, again, for the record. The comments made regarding Eldorado are misleading and not accurate. Eldorado has received the largest grant of low income funding from the State that's ever been offered. With regard to the CC&R's and all of the map questions, we've had meetings and will continue to have meetings. I do think that it would be a good idea for the residents to have their own attorney so they don't have to listen just to me. And with regard to beating rent control and raising the rents comment, I would just direct the Council to the May 41n letter and the items that were offered in that letter. Thank you. BAC Thank you, ma'am. And with that, I will close the public hearing and ask for comments from Council. JF Well, I have some questions. BAC Okay. JF It's probably a little late in the game, but the one gentleman who got up and spoke earlier ... we are being asked to approve a map, and the last thing I'm finding in my packet of mounds and reams of stuff is a map, so I guess I'd like to ask... is there 39 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 anyone here from Planning... if we could... he'll go get it. Okay, that'll tend to that one. Secondly, I want to ask the City Attorney, on Section 66427.5, subdivision F, it says the subdivider shall be subject to a hearing by a legislative body or advisory agency, which is authorized by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the map. The scope of the hearing shall be limited to the issue of compliance with this section. As I understand it, that section is the bonafide resident conversion statute in the Government Code. BH That's correct. JF When does this hearing take place? BH This is that hearing. JF Okay, so how can we determine if they've complied with the act when they haven't done anything in furtherance because they haven't had a map? It's a chicken and egg thing it seems. BH The Legislature, in all its wisdom, wasn't very clear in the legislation as to how the City is to determine whether or not (unclear) the process constitutes a bonafide resident conversion. It's clear under the statute that when the statute is set up and has a series of restrictions to be applicable if the conversion is a bonafide resident conversion, but in essence you ... I mean, it could be that you wouldn't find out for sure whether it is or not until after the map had been finaled and the process was well underway. So... JF So the Legislature didn't define what is bonafide? BH Not clearly in the statute, no. JF Okay. I looked up the legal definition of bonafide, and it says enter with good faith, honestly, openly, and sincerely, without deceit or fraud. How on earth are we supposed to ensure compliance with that before the owner even has a map? BH One of the suggestions in the conditions that we proposed earlier was that in order to establish that it is in fact bonafide resident conversion, that the applicant be required to come forward with a showing of a majority support from the residents. Another proposal that we put in the original offer, in the original condition, was that the applicant offer the spaces to the residents at a fair market value as determined by a neutral third party. So that would bean indication that it was a good faith effort to convert to resident ownership if there were prices set that could be agreed by, you know, a neutral party that were fair prices. I mean, that would be, I believe, a substantial indication that it was a bonafide process. .N PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 JF Okay, now... BH There may be other indusia (sp?) out there that maybe the applicant can come forward and suggest. JF Okay. Let me ask the applicant a question. There was a survey done, which I assume was mailed out to residents of all 191 spaces, of which 84 responded, of which 15 were in opposition, 37 declined to state, and 26 support it. Okay? (Inaudible) BAC Let the record show that Ms. Loftin has nodded agreement with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson's comments. JF And I did talk with Mr. Close earlier in the week and, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you indicated that an appraiser would be used in establishing the value of these lots. No ... you just told me that that's what your client was going to do. (Inaudible) JF Okay, do you read Code Section 66427.5, subdivision F, as not requiring you to do a survey? RC With all due respect, I give advice to our client. I think in the interpretation of the law that this City Attorney is the appropriate party. BAC Thank you, sir. JF Fair enough. Well, let me give you my interpretation of the law, Mr. Close. This Code section was intended to streamline conversions when there was a bonafide conversion about to happen. This Code section further allowed us to hold a hearing to determine whether it's a bonafide conversion and did so in a way that forces us to do it up front before your client has done anything. As I understand the concerns of the park residents, and I'm going to try and be very simple about this, and I'll put it in the hypothetical, but there are park owners out there who will attempt to convert a mobile home park simply to get out from underneath a rent control ordinance, not follow through on the conversion, and elevate all of the rents to market level. My concern as a Councilman in this City with a rent control ordinance is to make sure that nobody goes around the back door on a rent control ordinance, and I have a very vested concern to make sure that it is a bonafide conversion. If this is my one hearing to attach conditions which Subdivision F clearly says I can to ensure that it's bonafide, my interest is to put conditions on your map that ensure the bonafidees of this transaction. I further understand that 41 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 if you do not operate in a bonafide manner, that you do not get the protections of Section 66427.5, and we are thereby, as of right, able to condition your project to convert to sewer. The evidence that I've seen, at least, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, in its letter of April 27, 2005, seems to indicate their opinion that there are problems with the septic. CVWD has given us testimony that there's problem with the septic, and I think there's not a doubt in my mind that if you were just a developer and not a mobile home park, you would be required to convert to sewer. However, you are proceeding under this section that says if you do certain things, we can't do that, and my interest is to make sure that you do those certain things. I am prepared to offer language for a condition of approval that... BAC This is a condition of approval on the... JF Subdivision map that Mr. Smith is so eagerly looking for. BAC Nope, Mr. Smith is so eagerly providing for us. JF Maybe we can get the camera on that so the residents can take a look at it. SS That seems to be as good as we can reproduce it, unfortunately. Over the previous... BAC Well, that gives us the kind of clarity we've enjoyed throughout this process. (Laughter) JF Okay, are you ready? The condition would read as follows: There would be a connection to sewer on all lots prior to sale. Number 2, sewer conditions will be removed if, prior to approval of a final map, the applicant establishes, to the reasonable satisfaction of the City of Palm Desert, that the applicant's project will result in a bonafide resident conversion as required by Government Code Section 66427.5. The City understands a bonafide resident conversion to mean conversion likely to result in ownership by current residents of a majority of the lots. Evidence of a bonafide resident conversion shall include but not be limited to: 1) affidavits of support by a majority of the residents and/or 2) commitment by the applicant to sell lots to residents at a fair market value as confirmed by a neutral process. I would also like at some point, and this isn't part of the condition, but I'm asking you for it, that once you do your appraisal and you have all the information these folks reasonably need to make a decision on whether they want to sell their lots... ?? Buy their lots. W PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 JF ...buy their lots, excuse me, I would hope that we would know where we're at with the sewer, who's paying for it, whether they're going to be connected to sewer or not, how much their property is going to be valued at, and what is going to happen with the common areas in the park because most of the concerns that I get from residents is how can you ask me if I want to convert and not give me any of the decision I need to make that finding. So, I've got a copy of this for you, you can take it, but that would be my proposed condition on this subdivision map. BAC And in making that condition, then, it would be part of your hoped intent that that would allow the data that residents need to decide if they want to be in the process of being converted or not to appear, finally. JF Yes. And Mr. Close, I'm taking your client at his word. If he wants to do a bonafide conversion, that's what we want. But the law says I can condition it to make sure that it's bonafide, and that's what I'm attempting to do with this language. BAC Would it be appropriate to add as direction to staff, to go with these conditions, that we assertively pursue the appropriate, both local and State, water agencies to take actions that we believe make sure that the health and safety concerns of local residents are dealt with? BH That would be appropriate direction... BAC Okay. BH ...if the City Council so directs. BAC I would add that in as, not a condition, but as a staff direction, should your motion be seconded and passed. JF Agreed. BAC There is a motion on the Agenda. Let me see if there is a second to it. RAS I'll second it. BAC There is a second to this motion. BH Mr. Mayor, I would suggest that ... we don't have in front of us the proper resolution at this point with the proper findings, and I would suggest that you direct staff to prepare the resolution with that condition and the appropriate direction and have it before you at your next City Council meeting for adoption. 43 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 BAC Okay, so we would besetting the course with the acceptance and second, if there's a majority vote, and directing you to bring final language to us for a vote. BH That would be my recommendation. JF So it's clear for the residents, if Mr. Goldstein operates with a bonafide conversion, which is my mind fair, honest, sincere, and all those things that I read for you from this definition, then we cannot condition him to convert to sewer. We've been talking with Mr. Close about ways that the City may participate with the residents to accomplish that result. In the alternative, if Mr. Goldstein does not operate or qualify as a bonafide conversion, then we've placed a condition on his map that requires that he convert to sewer. So he sort of holds his own destiny in his hands. Either way, I think we're looking at getting you folks hooked up to sewer and getting you all the information you need to decide whether or not you want to buy your lots. BAC And ultimately, that's what you need to know to decide whether or not you wish to support the park owner's request, which is certainly part of that process or can be part of that process. RAS I'll then move to continue. BAC Nope... no ... no, there's no continuing needed. It is to direct staff to bring this back. RAS Well, then, direct staff to bring it back. CLO With the appropriate resolution. BAC Yes, ma'am. (Inaudible) BAC I suspect the answer by looking at that may not be ... but it is part of the public record and is available. (Inaudible) BAC Whether it has been posted on the internet or in front of somebody, the point is it is here, it is available, it is a part of the public record, and you are welcome to copies of that. And I believe Mr. Smith would work with you to make those available tomorrow. So ... wherever it has or hasn't been, we won't argue about this and that, but there it is. With that, then, is there ... there is a motion, there is a second. Would the Council please cast their ballots. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 RDK Motion carries 4-0, Councilmember Benson ABSENT. BAC Okay, and we are adjourned, then, for Closed Session until seven o'clock. For clarification purposes, Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve Parcel Map No. 31862 with the following conditions: a) Sewer all lots prior to sale; b) sewer conditions will be removed if, prior to approval of final map, applicant establishes to reasonable satisfaction of City that applicant's project will result in a "bona fide resident conversion" as required by Government Code §66427.5; City understands "bona fide resident conversion" to mean a conversion likely to result in ownership by current residents of a majority of the lots — evidence of bona fide resident conversion shall include, but not be limited to: i) affidavits of support by a majority of residents; and/or ii) commitment by applicant to sell lots to residents at fair market value, as confirmed by a neutral process; 2) direct staff to assertively pursue the appropriate local and state water agencies to take actions that the City believes will ensure that the health and safety concerns of local residents are addressed; 3) direct staff to prepare a resolution with the appropriate conditions and directions for action at the next City Council Meeting. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Councilmember Benson ABSENT. With City Council concurrence, Mayor Crites recessed the meeting to a dinner break at 6:34 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 7:03 p.m. 45 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 C. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL REGARDING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF AN EXPANSION OF THE SACRED HEART ELEMENTARY SCHOOLAND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW PARKING LOTS AT 43-775 DEEP CANYON ROAD Case No. CUP 04-13 (Roman Catholic Bishop of San Bernardino, Applicant) (Thomas W. McCutchen, Appellant) (Continued from the meetings of March 24, and April 28, 2005). Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted that his three children attended Sacred Heart School and Preschool, and he asked the City Attorney whether or not he was able to participate in this matter. Mr. Hargreaves asked whether the Council decision would have a financial impact, either positive or negative, and whether Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson received any special financial considerations from the Church or if he paid the regular tuition. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson responded that it would have no financial impact and that he did not receive any special financial considerations. Mr. Hargreaves stated that there would be no conflict of interest and that Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson could participate in the discussion and action. Associate Planner Francisco Urbina reviewed the staff report in detail, noting staff's recommendation to deny the appeal and affirm the Planning Commission's approval of Case No. CUP 04-13. He offered to answer any questions. With regard to traffic delays for vehicles exiting the Palmira subdivision, Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson asked what the delays would be when school is not coming into or going out of session versus what it is like when it is. Mr. Urbina said he did not think that was analyzed by the Traffic Engineer, as the focus was more on the delays during the peak morning hours when people are trying to leave the subdivision. Mayor Crites noted that it was difficult to figure out how much of an "additional hardship" it would be if there was no baseline of what it is like not during that time period. Mr. Urbina responded that this was something the Traffic Engineer might be better able to address. Upon question by Mayor Crites relative to the issue of a "less aesthetically appealing" roof line, Mr. Urbina noted that the Architectural Review Commission had not discussed that issue at that level of detail because it did not desire to see a flat roof building. With regard to the delays exiting the Palmira subdivision, Mayor EN PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Crites asked what provision staff desired to have in terms of traffic control during those peak times. Mr. Urbina responded that the Master Plan proposed creating two school drop-off/pick-up points, while there was currently only one pick-up point. That would help keep additional delays to a minimum. He said there was also a Public Works condition of approval that required the Church to regularly monitor traffic activities, and the City reserved the right to request that the Traffic Engineer re -analyze the project traffic impacts to make sure everything is flowing smoothly. If additional traffic mitigation measures need to be implemented, the City reserved the right to request they be implemented. Such measures would include staggering school start times in 45-minute increments. He said the Church had also voluntarily implemented the hiring of traffic monitors during weekend worship services, and that had helped traffic flow on weekends. He added that in January of this year, the Church had changed the start times for its weekday services from 7.30 a.m. to 7.45 a.m., as had been recommended by the first traffic study. Mayor Crites asked whether the items mentioned by Mr. Urbina constituted the full range of other traffic measures that were contemplated. Mr. Urbina agreed and said that based on the supplemental traffic analysis, which was based on traffic counts during the peak season in March of 2005, the traffic engineer concluded that the original recommendations to consider creating a secondary access from the Palmira subdivision onto Moss Rose Drive and to look at installation of islands on the Church driveways off of Deep Canyon were no longer necessary. Councilman Spiegel stated that one concern of homeowner Thomas McCutchen was vehicles parking on the east side of Deep Canyon and people crossing the street to get to the Church. He asked whether it would be possible to red -curb Deep Canyon on that side to prohibit parking. Mr. Urbina said that was something that could be considered. Upon question by Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson relative to creation of a secondary access from the Palmira subdivision onto Moss Rose Drive, Mr. Urbina responded that based on the level of traffic impacts at build -out of the project, the traffic counts taken during the peak season, and the fact that people leaving the Palmira subdivision during the weekday morning peak period would only experience an average additional delay of approximately one second, the traffic engineer (Tom Brohard), in his professional opinion, believed that this secondary access was not warranted. He said the traffic 47 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 impacts were primarily during the weekday because that was when the school operated. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said it was his understanding that there was already a problem there, with or without this expansion, and he felt the City had created that problem when the Moss Rose residents vehemently objected to that secondary access during processing the Palmira subdivision map, and the City agreed to close it. He said he traveled in that area in the mornings and felt it might be better to allow people to come out farther down Deep Canyon so they could get past the two ingress/egress points that were primarily used for school drop-off. He asked whether the City's Traffic Engineer felt there was a problem there now and what could be done to address it now. Mr. Urbina noted that the supplemental traffic study looked at the possibility of opening up an access from Sacred Heart parking lot onto Florine Avenue but concluded that it would create more problems than it would solve. Transportation Engineer Mark Diercks said he agreed there was a problem in that area now, and no solution had yet been determined. He said the problem was only during a 15-minute period in the mornings, and it was typical of school areas. Upon question by Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson relative to having a sworn officer there during that 15-minute period to regulate ingress and egress from Palmira, he said that might help the situation, but it could possibly hurt as well because traffic on Deep Canyon would have to be stopped. He added that staff did not see the delay to the Palmira residents as being a big problem. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, he said the opening of Aztec Way for Palm Desert High School seemed to have helped by routing quite a bit of that traffic off of Deep Canyon and lowering the traffic counts on Deep Canyon by approximately 40 percent. Upon question by Mayor Crites relative to Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson's comment about opening Moss Rose, Mr. Diercks stated that while it was a viable option, it was not open because of opposition from residents on that street, although opening it would improve this situation by giving people another way to go. Mayor Crites declared the public hearing open and invited testimony. HOWARD LINCOLN, Pastor of Sacred Heart Church, said Council was very familiar with the proposal and that he would address the concerns raised by the neighbors and by the City. The proposed new parking lot would give them 856 spaces; the ratio of Church seating to available parking spaces EN PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 would be 1.6. The Church did hire a private traffic firm and would do the same in the coming season. He understood now that they could hire the Police Department and would like to do that if it would help. He said they had agreed, if necessary in the future, to tear down one of the remaining duplexes and make that into additional parking. In light of the concerns with the height of the proposed hall, they were willing to reduce it to 33 feet. There was also a concern that the Church would attempt to purchase additional adjoining land, but he gave his pledge that they would not do that, as he felt it was completely unrealistic and would be economic suicide. In terms of noise, basketball and volleyball games were currently held outside; if the project was approved and a hall was constructed, those games would be held indoors, and the noise would be reduced. They had also assured all of the adjoining homes that they would not be holding weekend sporting events. While he did not want to say they would never have any such events, there had been no sporting events there on the weekends for at least the past four years, and none were planned for the next year. With regard to the neighbors' concerns about lights, he said there were no lights in the field; he said that was an agreement, and the Church was in full agreement with it. The Church did not want lights, it could not afford them, and they were not necessary. Mayor Crites noted the mature palm trees and pine trees along the perimeter on Deep Canyon, and he asked for assurance that that existing landscaping would remain, thereby softening whatever structure is approved at whatever height. Father Lincoln agreed and said the Council could make that a condition if it wished. In response to questions by Council regarding traffic delays, MR. TOM BROHARD reviewed the traffic report he had prepared dated May 27, 2005. He projected an increase delay time of approximately one second with the expansion of the school and the addition of 90 children. With regard to opening Moss Rose, he disagreed with the prior traffic study, which had identified this opening as a measure to mitigate the impacts to Via Palmira and Deep Canyon. The work included in the supplemental report, using a different methodology, indicated there were no impacts and, therefore, there were no necessary mitigation measures identified. He agreed it would provide a secondary access, but it was not required. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said that one second might end up being the straw on the camel's back that does them in. In dropping off and picking up his children on a daily basis, he knew there were significant conflicts there. He asked whether consideration had been given to altering trafficflows for drop- PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 off and pick-up so there is one ingress point and a separate egress point farther away from that area. Mr. Brohard stated that would occur with the master plan, which he showed and explained to the Council. Upon question by Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson, he said he had not looked at requiring people to enter from Deep Canyon and exit onto Fred Waring. MR. TIM HOLT, Principle Architect of Holt Architects, further explained the master plan in terms of parental drop-off and pick-up locations. He noted that preschool parents had already been requested to access the site from Fred Waring rather than Deep Canyon. The upper grades (6 through 8) would also be encouraged to enter the site from Fred Waring, and those parents who then want to egress to the west would progress out onto Fred Waring, while those who prefer to go east would have the option of exiting onto Deep Canyon. This would spread out the various age group drop- off/pick-up functions so as to not have it concentrated at any one point but to spread it along both streets to the largest degree feasible. Councilman Spiegel asked whether there was enough land there to create deceleration/acceleration lanes on both Deep Canyon and Fred Waring. Mr. Holt responded that he was not familiar with what right-of-way may be available to do that. Mayor Crites asked what would be the maximum the roof could be lowered and still allow for basketball in the proposed gymnasium. Mr. Holt said they would prefer to have the sloped roof as proposed; however, it might be possible to decrease the height by up to three feet and still maintain the architectural expression. MR. THOMAS McCUTCHEN, 24 Via Cielo Azul, Palm Desert, read and submitted a petition signed by 137 local residents around the community of Sacred Heart Church and School (on file and of record in the City Clerk's office). He said this was not just a Palmira issue but was one which the entire community around Sacred Heart was concerned about because of additional traffic, noise, and parking. He reviewed meetings he had had with the Planning Department, Traffic Engineer, Architect, and the Church, and at no time was he advised that the building height had been increased to 35 feet, 11 feet above the zoning allowance. He said the first he had heard of this was at the February 51h Planning Commission meeting, he had not been notified of this change prior to the meeting, and he and other members of the neighborhood were not prepared to comment on the height exception at that 50 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 meeting. He said residents were opposed to this project because of increased traffic, noise, blocking of views, lighting and sound from sporting events. They recommended that Council approve the four additional classroom buildings but requested denial of the 35-foot, 17,000 square foot parish hall/gymnasium and sports field. The following individuals also spoke in OPPOSITION to the project due to building height, increased traffic, noise, blocking of views, lighting and sound from sporting events, destruction of existing residential homes, lowered property valuation, privacy issues, safety of pedestrians and drivers, safety of children with adjacent residential pools, possible setting of a precedent with approval of outdoor p.a. system and lights, size of proposed gymnasium, parking, and ingress/egress: MR. BILL RENNER suggested digging further down for the foundation of the building to mitigate the height concerns. MR. NORMAN EASTWOOD, 74-474 Myrsine Avenue, covered points included in his letter dated June 23, 2005 (on file and of record in the City Clerk's office). MARTY SCHLOTZHAUER, 32 Via Cielo Azul, suggested that the classrooms be put where the gymnasium is proposed to be located and that the gymnasium be moved next to the field where all the sports activity will take place. MR. JIM LYALL, 31 Via Cielo Azul MR. ARTHUR BISHOP, 21 Via Cielo Azul, questioned the need for a height variation for the gymnasium when his research showed the height of an NBA regulation basketball hoop was no higher than 10 feet from the ground, and the height of an NBA regulation backboard was only 42 inches, for a total of under 14 feet in height. He asked why an additional 25 feet in height was needed from the hoop to the top of the building when 14 feet from the hoop to the top of the structure was sufficient. MR. WADE LITTLE, 74-413 Myrsine MS. MARGARET GERTZ, 74-457 Myrsine MR. STEVE ROOS, 74-489 Myrsine, asked who had commissioned and paid for the traffic study. He questioned the finding of 40% reduction in traffic on Deep Canyon because of Aztec Road and said he did not feel the traffic had diminished. 51 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 MR. DANA CARNES, 43-550 Palmilla Street MR. DENNIS KASPEREIT, 6 Via Dulcinea MR. JAVIER REYES, 43-420 Palmilla Circle, said he was one of the residents who had not signed the petition, not because he had no concerns but because he felt that, between the City and the architect, solutions could be found to alleviate the problems. He felt the project would be great for the community and the school. He added that during the ten years he had lived in his home, he had heard more noise from the Middle School and the High School in the evenings and with the morning p.a. system than he did from Sacred Heart Church. MS. CAROL MORTON, realtor and Sacred Hearth parishioner, said she had met in December and January with all but two of the homeowners along Myrsine and Pamilla, and they were given a map showing the layout of the school with everything that was planned. The major concerns dealt with landscaping, how the Church was going to do the walls, the type of shrubs and trees that would be used, and whether or not their views would be blocked. She vehemently objected to comments made relative to property values decreasing as a result of this project. MS. SUMMER LITTLE, 74-413 Myrsine, agreed that Ms. Morton had met with residents; however, she said they were under the impression that this project was a done deal and that it was going to built. Residents were asked whether they wanted a six-foot wall or an eight -foot wall and what trees they wanted. She said she felt Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson should recuse himself and not participate in discussion and action on this item because of his involvement with the School. MR. MICHAEL MUFFOLETTO, 23 Via Cielo Azul, said the Council was here to represent the community and to make an honest and fair decision. MR. BOB BOOTH, 50 Paseo Montecillo, said he did not feel any of the residents in Palmira were against the school; they felt it was good, but they wanted it to be done correctly. The following individuals spoke in favor of the project: MR. MIKE ROVER, 73-265 Willow Street MS. KIMBERLY LYNCH, 78-675 Bradford Circle, La Quinta, spoke as Chair of the Development Committee and parent of a student attending Sacred Heart School. 52 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 MR. DAVID TARATUTA, 24 Via Cielo Azul, said while the current parking needs were being addressed, he was concerned about having enough paved parking if the gym and hall were built. He felt the parish needed to dream bigger and plan for future growth. He also noted his letter dated June 13th, which he had presented to the City earlier in the week. He supported the following: the supplemental study's recommendation to red curb Deep Canyon, the expansion of the school and the classrooms, and having some type of playing field, although he would be concerned if it evolved into a competitive track and sports and soccer. He was concerned with ingress and egress, especially with five driveways in a quarter mile stretch and vehicles going in and out all at the same time. This situation would only get worse with increased parking, and he felt it needed to be addressed. MS. LAURA ALCORN, resident of Bermuda Dunes and parent of a student at Sacred Heart School MS. ANGELA ROVER, 45-657 Quailbrush, Palm Desert, spoke in favor of the school and said the traffic problems with this project were the result of church services on the weekends rather than due to the school. She felt the two issues should be kept separate and that the focus should be on encouraging the students through good education and a good place to go to school. MS. CINDY FARRELL, parent of two students at Sacred Heart and resident of the Coachella Valley for over 25 years MR. VINCENT GIOIA (sp?), 44-819 Del Dios With no further testimony offered, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. With Council concurrence, Mayor Crites called a recess at 9.15 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 9.19 p.m. Councilmember Benson felt it would be possible to lower the roof line on the building, although she felt having the gymnasium and indoor sports was more important than aesthetics, and the building itself was what was important and needed for the students. She said people who move into neighborhoods with schools and churches should expect that there will be children and noise. She added that Deep Canyon was a collector street, not a thoroughfare like Fred Waring, and it will always have traffic; if the residents want it red curbed, that would be acceptable to her. While there might be some internal changes that could be made on the layout itself, she felt the project was a welcome addition to the community. She noted that in 53 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 the communities in which she had lived, she had never seen a church and school of that magnitude decrease property values, as there were always people waiting to get into those neighborhoods. She said the property to the back of the church was always meant for expansion at some time, and a lot of people were not here when the church was built and did not know how this community was built. She felt this was a good project and was an enhancement to the area. Councilman Spiegel noted that the City could place restrictions on the Conditional Use Permit. There was concern about lights on the playing field, and one of the conditions was that there would never be lights on the playing field. Another concern was noise from a public address (P.A.) system; a condition of the Permit was that there would be no P.A. system, and that had been approved by the Church and by the Planning Commission. With regard to street parking, he felt a condition should be added to red curb the east side of Deep Canyon. The main traffic impacts were on weekends, and it was his understanding that the Church had agreed to use off -duty Palm Desert Police Officers for traffic control. With regard to the concern that the Church will continue to, he said the Church had made a commitment that it would not expand further and that it would not purchase any additional land or add to the size of the parish. He felt the height of the hall/gymnasium was a problem that needed to be addressed. He also felt there should be an acceleration/deceleration lane on Deep Canyon into the Church parking lot, as it would get vehicles into and out of the parking lot much faster. He asked that staff bring the Council up to date on what kind of lighting would be needed for the parking lot and how or whether it would affect adjacent residents. In general, he felt the Church had been a good neighbor. Councilman Kelly said even though the City has a warm heart toward the Church, he felt there was a limit to how far it can grow. He was impressed with all the agreements that had been made: once this project is completed, the Church will not be requesting any additional building; no lights or speaker system on the field; red curbing on Deep Canyon; walls to surround the adjoining tract of homes at a height acceptable to neighbors. He said the worst part of the traffic was on Sunday, and this project was not going to change that. Most of the growth was for the school itself, which was basically on weekdays, and there was similar traffic around all of the schools. He agreed there needed to be acceleration/deceleration lanes to help with traffic flow and felt the project should move ahead. Mayor Crites said as it is currently constituted, he could not in good conscience vote for this project. He expressed concern with the playing field directly adjacent to existing residential. With regard to property values, he 54 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 did not feel this project would cause a decrease in the values; however, he felt values would not increase at the rate that others would. He said he did not see any reason why the entire playing field could not be shifted over toward Deep Canyon, where it would at least have the buffering of the green belt along Deep Canyon, a major street which already has noise on it, and then another wall on the other side. He said the fact that the Church had been at this location for a long time did not have anything to do with a brand- new building that is 35 feet high, primarily to accommodate architecture and basketball. He agreed children needed an indoor place to play, and it would be much better for them, but he did not think it needed to be that high, as a lower height could accommodate almost everything necessary. He agreed the City could mitigate most of the traffic issues to make it at least as good as it is now, if not better, by doing some things in terms of changing traffic flow, hiring off -duty Police Officers to provide traffic control, painting curbs red, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson said he had conferred with the City Attorney before he even received his Agenda packet to see if this issue was something he could or should participate in, and the City Attorney said yes. He said the reason he had asked that was to disclose that he did have children who attended Sacred Heart School, although he was neither a Catholic nor a parishioner. He said he and his wife had chosen this school based on its educational quality alone, and it did not have anything to do with basketball courts, gymnasiums, expansion plans, etc. He felt it was his duty to participate in these types of matters. This was a very simple land use issue, having nothing to do with religion, where individual Councilmembers attend church, or what individual Councilmembers want. He said the entire property was zoned for school use. The traffic study showed that some residents have to sit in line for 140 seconds waiting to get out of or into their residential area, which he felt was completely unacceptable. Based on that delay, that was a traffic condition of Level F, and this was something that could be addressed with measures such as red curbing Deep Canyon. He liked the idea of having sworn Police Officers to help regulate traffic during those busy times. With regard to the height of the parish hall, he felt it could be brought down to a reasonable height so that it would not impact anyone's views. With regard to the playground issue, he felt that was something that needed further study, as he did not know what went on at the school during the day. He did not know where the recess was proposed to be, whether the fields were going to be for football, soccer, baseball, etc., or whether it was a track for kids to run around. He felt that was something that could be mitigated. He noted the sound walls along Fred Waring Drive and said those residents had not complained about noise from that street, so it was possible to build a wall to attenuate the noise. 55 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 With regard to property values, he said sometimes projects like this can enhance property values ratherthan decrease them, and that was something the market would determine. He said he felt solutions could be found to control the quality of the development, mitigate the traffic, and work on the building height so that the project could be something that would be acceptable to everyone and fit in with the community. Councilman Spiegel suggested consideration be given to placing the parish hall/gymnasium near the existing preschool and putting the playing field/track in the location of the proposed parish hall. Councilman Kelly suggested instead that staff be directed to work on relocating these proposed new facilities on the site in a way that would best suit everyone. Mayor Crites felt locating the gymnasium adjacent to Fred Waring would not interfere with views and would raise significantly fewer issues with him such as compatibility of height. He said he would be in favor of directing staff to meet with the applicant to discuss this. 56 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, direct staff to work with the Applicant on ways to mitigate issues raised at this meeting, including red -curbing Deep Canyon on the east and/or west sides, condition that there be no future expansions, ingress/egress and deceleration/acceleration lanes for both streets (primarily Deep Canyon), secondary access from Palmira (Moss Rose), heights/locations of facilities, lighting on parking lot, and exterior sound — with a resulting recommendation to be provided for consideration at the next City Council Meeting. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. With Council concurrence, Mayor Crites called a recess at 9.50 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 9.56 p.m. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT FOUR GENERAL OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TOTALING 65,892 SQUARE FEETAND A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO ALLOW VARYING ROOF HEIGHTS UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 34'6" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 73-700 DINAH SHORE DRIVE Case No. PP 04-33 (Venture Corporation and Ware Malcomb, Thomas Sun, Applicants) (Continued from the meetings of May 12, and June 9, 2005). Planning Manager Steve Smith reviewed the staff report and recommendation, offering to answer any questions. He also noted the report included in the packets from City Engineer Mark Greenwood, dated June 23, 2005, which added supplemental conditions that addressed issues raised by Council at the last meeting. He said he had spoken with the applicant, who was in agreement with the additional conditions. Mayor Crites declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this matter. MR. MARK PARRY, Venture Corporation, confirmed his company's agreementwith conditions outlined in the staff report, including the additional conditions noted by Mr. Smith. MR. BROCK GRAYSON, Ware Malcomb Architects, 20950 Warner Center Drive, Woodland Hills, California, said he was aware that the Council was struggling with granting approval based on the height variance. He reviewed the project itself and explained how they had arrived at the requested height, which they felt was needed for the second story and to sufficiently screen the roof mounted equipment. He added that the project is located in an industrial area, and he was not aware of any residents opposed to the height variance. 57 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 With no further testimony offered, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Spiegel said he felt this would be an excellent project for Dinah Shore Drive. With the conditions as agreed, he would vote to approve the project. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05-34, approving Case No. PP 04-33, including building height exception, subject to conditions as outlined by staff. Motion was seconded by Kelly. Mayor Crites said he appreciated the applicant's willingness to work with the traffic report, which he felt showed good faith. He felt the architectural "pop outs" and variations added to the look of the project, as did the wide variety of colors. However, he did not feel there was enough "significant architectural merit" to grant a height exception, and he would, therefore, not be able to vote in favor of the project. Mayor Crites called for the vote, and the motion FAILED by a 2-2 vote, with Councilmember Benson and Mayor Crites voting NO and Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. Mayor Crites noted that while Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson had left the meeting to attend to some personal business, he was not sure whether or not he would return. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this matter to the meeting of July 14, 2005. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Benson said it was her understanding that Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson would not return to this meeting. Mr. Parry asked whether the Council would consider approval of the project if the height was brought down to 30 feet at a straight plane across the top. The other features (texture, colors, ins and outs, etc.) would remain as proposed. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further and adopt Resolution No. 05-34, as amended to exclude the request for height exception and to include the additional Public Works Conditions as presented. Motion was seconded by Kelly. m PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Councilmember Benson commented that it seemed almost every application for a project in that area was coming in with a request for height exception, and she expressed concern with having the entire north side of the City covered with two- and three-story buildings. She felt it was neither necessary nor compatible with the landscape of the desert. Mayor Crites called for the vote, and the motion carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE, PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT OFAMIXED USE RESIDENTIAL (33 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS) AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTER (30,550 SQUARE FEET) ON 8.63ACRES ATTHE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONTEREY AVENUE AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, 73-100 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE Case Nos. C/Z 04-06, PP 04-32, and TT 33120 (Robert Mayer Corp. c/o Larry Brose, Applicant). Planning Manager Steve Smith reviewed the staff report and recommendation, offering to answer any questions. Mayor Crites asked what percentage of the total traffic out of the entire project per day was from the commercial component and what percentage was from residential. Mr. Diercks responded that approximately 80% was commercial, and 20% was residential. Mayor Crites said it was his understanding that the signal that would be installed was of value for the residential only and not the commercial, and Mr. Diercks agreed. Mayor Crites said it was obvious to him that someone going to that commercial project ought to go down Country Club in order to use the stop light rather than having to use Monterey where there is no signal. He asked how someone would be able to travel south on Monterey from the commercial center since they would not be able to get to a signal. Mr. Diercks responded that drivers would exit the driveway on Country Club, traverse three or four lanes, and get into the westbound left turn pocket. Mayor Crites questioned the three areas of dead end parking and said the only area that had flow was also the one place where people drive through; he did not feel this was optimal. Mayor Crites declared the public hearing open and invited testimony from the applicant. MR. LARRY BROSE, Mayer Corporation, thanked staff for going through the many iterations on this project. He felt what was before Council now was the 59 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 best proposal for the property based on what they understood was CounciI's action last year in designating the site mixed use, commercial and residential. He noted that the residential units would be sold to home buyers, and the commercial centerwould be retained by the Mayerfamily as a long-term asset. He concurred with staff's recommendation and conditions of approval except for Public Works Condition #24 relative to funding of the signal. With regard to clarification on the General Plan land use designation, he said they were prepared to request a continuance in order to clarify that issue. He offered to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel noted there were two pads in addition to the pad where Walgreens was proposed to be located, and he asked what was planned for those two pads. Mr. Brose responded that no tenants had been identified at this point in time. Councilman Spiegel stated that there were several restaurants in the center across the street from this project, and residents directly behind those restaurants had really objected to them because of the smells. Mr. Brose noted that this issue had been discussed at Planning Commission, and he was very sensitive to it. He said he could probably work with a condition restricting the types of tenants allowed. Councilman Kelly said he was not in favor of approving this project as proposed with residential and commercial being done on the same parcel as one project. He was concerned with the traffic impacts of the development as well as the parking situation as noted by Mayor Crites. Councilmember Benson said if this was going to be a mixed use project on that corner, she would rather see the residential mixed with office professional rather than commercial, although she would prefer that it be entirely residential. Mayor Crites invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this matter. MR. DES McCARTHY, 263 Strata Fortuna, Vice President of the Merano Homeowners Association, noted that the original parcel was a 40-acre site with residential zoning. It was originally requested to be zoned commercial, and the City Council decided to keep it residential. He said the Merano development portion of the site was approximately 30 acres; it was zoned and built residential, and the remaining 8.63 acres of the site remained as residential, R-7. The applicant had several times requested a change of zone for the parcel, but the Council has denied the requests. Over the last ten years, members of the Merano Board of Directors had had many opportunities to speak with the applicant and had, on more than one occasion, suggested a compromise mixing residential with office .E PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 professional, which was more in keeping with the City and the standard of living enjoyed by residents of Merano. He did not feel there was a need for additional commercial in that area in light of the fact that the former Albertson's store was still vacant, businesses in that center were relocating elsewhere, and the existing new Albertson's center across the street in Rancho Mirage still had vacant units after two years. He expressed concern with the requested change of zone, the Code exception with regard to the setback, traffic and parking problems, etc. He noted that he was interested to hear at this meeting about the offer from the applicant to share expenses on Via Sena that the Merano Homeowners Association had been keeping up (with slurry, landscaping, watering) for over ten years and said that no such formal offer had come from a management company or to any member of the Homeowners Association. He questioned staff's comment that the ability to make left turns onto Monterey Avenue from Merano had always been considered "temporary", when it had been this way for nearly ten years. MR. MARK KAPLAN, 152 Via Tramonto, agreed with Mr. McCarthy's comments and noted the letter he had submitted dated June 22, 2005 (on file and of record in the City Clerk's office). He asked that Council deny the applicant's request for a continuance. He felt there was not a need for more commercial space and felt two-story housing overlooking commercial made no sense. He also disagreed with the variances requested, and he asked that Council deny the project. MR. MICHAEL CARLE, 263 Strata Fortuna, Palm Desert, agreed with comments made by the previous two speakers. Instead of a commercial center, he would prefer to have some type of office complex or professional medical as part of the mixed use. He expressed concern with the proposed 24-hour Walgreens. Mayor Crites asked whether Council wished to consider continuing this public hearing at the request of the applicant. Councilman Kelly said he would not vote in favor of the project as it is currently proposed, and he did not see a need for a continuance. Councilman Spiegel agreed and said office professional, such as the Cornerstone project on Country Club and Portola, made a lot of sense to him. He said if he were to vote on this project tonight, he would vote against it. Councilmember Benson said she would be more in favor of denying the project. 61 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Mayor Crites said he personally felt an obligation to extend the courtesy of granting a continuance if requested by either homeowners or an applicant. However, he did share the opinions of his Council colleagues and did not think this was a corner for a commercial development. He felt the layout was unwise and said he would not vote in favor of commercial on that site, although he would go with entirely residential. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, deny staff's recommendations for approval. Motion was seconded by Benson. MR. R. J. MAYER said he would like an opportunity to meet with staff, understand the history, and look at this site and project, which might require some significant changes in the plan. He asked for Council's consideration of the continuance. Mayor Crites called for the vote, and the motion carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A 31,679 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, INCLUDING A 2,500 SQUARE FOOT MEZZANINE, A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A BUILDING HEIGHT UP TO 34'6", AND ALLOW THE OUTDOOR STORAGE OF BUILDING MATERIALS ON A 3.43-ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 73-600 DINAH SHORE DRIVE, EAST OF LEILANI WAY Case No. PP 05-02 (CMC White Cap and Ware Malcomb, Thomas Sun, Applicants). Associate Planner Francisco Urbina reviewed the staff report and recommendation in detail, offering to answer any questions. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, he responded that this site would be occupied by one business. Upon question by Mayor Crites, he stated that staff's recommendation would include three supplemental conditions of approval as stated in the City Engineer's June 23, 2005, memorandum. Councilman Spiegel asked whether this would include an acceleration/deceleration lane. Mr. Diercks responded that it would include a 100-foot right -turn pocket on the westerly entrance that is shared with the property to the west, although there was adequate space to do so. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Mayor Crites declared the public hearing open and invited testimony from the applicant. MR. GRAHAM DENNIS, representing the CMC group in Denver, Colorado, said this was a building for White Cap Construction Supply and had always been planned for this company. He said they had conformed with all the requirements that staff had requested. He noted there was an acceleration/deceleration lane shared with the adjacent property, and there were 100-foot-deep throats on both entrances as well. Additionally, they had gone along with the City's requirements and had not requested parking along Dinah Shore Drive. He noted they had increased the panel height on some of the corners per staff recommendations to add a little bit of "pop" to some of the corners; otherwise, the building height conformed with the 30- foot requirement in this area. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, he responded that White Cap Construction Supply was owned by Home Depot and distributed only to contractors. Upon further question by Council, he responded that they had never indicated they would stack items outdoors above eight feet, but staff requested that the wall height be twelve feet (ten feet solid block wall with a two -foot trellis). Mr. Urbina said staff could amend Community Development Department Condition #16, which currently reads, "The height of storage pallets and other building materials stored outdoors shall not exceed the 12-foot height of the perimeter screen wall and shall not be visible from a public street." It could be changed to "shall not exceed a height of eight feet." Mayor Crites noted for the record that the applicant was in agreement with that amendment. Mayor Crites invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this request. MR. BROCK GRAYSON, Ware Malcomb Architects, 20950 Warner Center Lane, Woodland Hills, California, noted that the screen wall in the back was an eight -foot -high split block wall across the entire length of the back, with a four -foot metal trellis on top of that. Councilmember Benson asked whether the increased height was just on the corners. Mr. Grayson responded that the majority of the building was at 29 feet, 6 inches, with higher panels on the corners to give the building more flair based on staff's request to break the plane. He also asked that Council allow the applicant to work with staff on the purple accent color at the main entry, as some of the Senior Vice Presidents of White Cap were concerned 63 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 that might not be quite what contractors wanted to see when they drive up to the building. With no further testimony offered, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05- 55, approving Case No. PP 05-02, including building height exception, subject to conditions. Motion was seconded by Kelly. Mayor Crites said it seemed that all of the projects were coming to the City at the absolute maximum height allowed, 30 feet, and then consideration was being given to finding something that made it architecturally good and added to the height of the buildings. He disagreed with that approach, although he felt the project was otherwise well done. Mayor Crites called for the vote, and the motion FAILED by a 2-2 vote, with Councilmember Benson and Mayor Crites voting NO. Mr. Dennis stated that the applicant was willing to reduce the height of the panels. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 05- 55, as amended to exclude the request for height exception, limit the height of outdoor storage to eight feet, and to include the additional Public Works conditions as presented. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PALM DESERT CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/06. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Councilman Spiegel questioned Table 1 on page 4 of the staff report, noting that some of the districts had the word "yes" in the renovation column, while others had nothing in that column. He asked if the blanks actually meant "no". Mr. Croy stated that those were districts that voted against moving to desert landscaping. The "yes" votes were districts that voted for the desert landscaping and agreed to an increased levy. PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 MS. DANA VASQUEZ, Muni Financial, noted that this was all from the last fiscal year. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel regarding Sandpiper West, she said residents had agreed to pay $386.88. Mayor Crites declared the public hearing open and invited testimony in FAVOR of or in OPPOSITION to this request. With no testimony offered, he declared the public hearing closed. 65 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution No. 05-56, amending or approving the Final Engineer's Report for the Palm Desert Consolidated Landscape & Lighting District FY2005/06; 2) Resolution No. 05-57, ordering the levy and collection of assessments within the Palm Desert Consolidated Landscape and Lighting District FY 2005/06. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson ABSENT. XIV. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER ►= B. CITY ATTORNEY Mr. Hargreaves requested the City Council reconvene its Closed Session for a brief time at the end of this regular meeting. C. CITY CLERK None D. PUBLIC SAFETY o Fire Department Fire Marshal David Avila commented: Fire engine the City donated to Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo (Ix-Zi) had arrived there about 6:00 p.m. yesterday, and their firefighters were most appreciative. One of Palm Desert's firefighters would be traveling to Ix-Zi around July 7 to provide training for operation of the donated engine. In answer to question, he responded that about 50 people would be going to Ix-Zi later this summer to participate in the Day of the Firefighter celebration. 2. Upon inquiry about the fires occurring in the region this week, he said the fire along Highway 62 involved 4,000 acres, no containment estimate yet; and the fire near Soboba Casino in Riverside County, which affected local crews, involved about 99 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 2,500 acres with containment expected by tomorrow evening at 6:00 p.m. Mayor Crites expressed appreciation to Firefighters at Town Center Station when they hosted the Sister Cities Program and visitors from Ix-Zi and Gisborne one evening this week. o Police Department ►= E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Tree City USA — Mayor Crites noted his red memo that had been distributed to the City Council. He was asking for permission to direct staff to evaluate the program and its requirements. He felt the City already met the qualifications and would simply be something the City could advertise. With City Council concurrence, staff was directed to evaluate this program and Palm Desert's qualifications to be so designated. o City Council Committee Reports: 1. Sister Cities Committee — Mayor Crites reported that Palm Desert's Program had received the "Innovation Award for Humanitarian Assistance." He said other cities recognized were much larger, such as Ft. Worth, Texas, which meant the City was certainly in good company. He expressed thanks to City staff and volunteers who have made these programs so successful. o City Council Comments: 1. Shopper Hopper — Councilmember Benson said she'd received a note of thanks from longtime resident Jean Ernst regarding the Shopper Hopper. As Ms. Ernst left the Living Desert recently, she mistakenly left her purse on top of her car and drove away. The Shopper Hopper driver saw what had happened, stopped to pick up the purse, and returned it to her 67 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 2005 at home. Ms. Ernst was pleased to be the recipient of such a good gesture. With concurrence, the City Council directed that a presentation be scheduled for a future City Council Meeting in order to publicly recognize the driver's good deed. 2. Thank you — Mayor Crites thanked all the staff for an excellent job during this meeting through a lot of contentious and otherwise difficult matters. XV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None XVI. ADJOURNMENT With City Council concurrence, Mayor Crites adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 11:30 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 11:38 p.m. and immediately adjourned with no action announced from Closed Session. BUFORD A. CRITES, MAYOR ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA