HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrelim CC Minutes 02-23-2006 PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2006
CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER
I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M.
Mayor Ferguson convened the meeting at 3:01 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilmember Jean M. Benson
Councilman Buford A. Crites
Mayor Pro Tem Richard S. Kelly
Councilman Robert A. Spiegel
Mayor Jim Ferguson
Also Present:
Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager/RDA Executive Director
David J. Erwin, 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
Phil Drell, Director of Community Development
Doug Van Gelder, Director of Information Systems
Mark D. Greenwood, Director of Public Works
David Yrigoyen, Director of Redevelopment & Housing
Frankie Riddle, Acting Director of Special Programs
J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Finance Director .
Walt Holloway, Battalion Chief, Palm Desert/Riverside County Fire Dept./CDF
Craig Kilday, Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside County Sheriff's Dept.
Steve Thetford, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside County Sheriff's Dept.
Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk
III. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Request for Closed Session:
Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8:
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
1) Property: Right-of-WayAcquisition-MontereyAvenue(APN 653-260-024)
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Mark D. Greenwood/City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: MC Properties
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
2) Property: Right-of-WayAcquisition-MontereyAvenue(APN 653-260-022)
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Mark D. Greenwood/City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: MacLeod Couch Land Company
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the
following Property Negotiation Item Nos. 3 and 4 were added to the Closed Session
Agenda.
3) Property: 10 acres ±, NEC Country Club Drive/Desert Willow Drive
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Justin McCarthy/City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: Sanderson J. Ray/Desert Springs Partners
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
4) Property: 8,800 acres — Joshua Hills (Sect. 27, T3S R6E;
Sect. 35, T3S R6E; Government Lots 17, 18, 19, and 20;
Portion Sect. 30, T3S R7E)
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: Friends of the Desert Mountains
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b):
Number of potential cases: 2
With City Council concurrence, Mayor Ferguson 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
2
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MINUTES of the Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting of February 3,
2006, and the Regular City Council Meeting of February 9, 2006
Rec: Approve as presented.
B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant
Nos. 162, 163, 167, 168, and 169.
Rec: Approve as presented.
C. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#559� by Denisha Renee Minor in the
Estimated Amount of$9,000.
Rec: By Minute Motion, reject the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify
the Claimant.
D. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
1. Historic Preservation Committee Meeting of November 28, 2005.
2. Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting of January 17, 2006.
3. Public Safety Commission Meeting of January 11, 2006.
4. Youth Committee Meeting of January 3, 2006. .
Rec: Receive and file.
E. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Destroy Paper Records from the
Department of Building & Safety that Have Been Digitally Imaged
(September and October 2005).
Rec: Waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution No. 06-17 - for
September 2005 records; 2) Resolution No. 06-18-for October 2005
records.
F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Transfer of Contracts from
Steven Burt & Associates, Inc., to Vintage Associates, Inc.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the transfer of contracts with
Steven Burt & Associates, Inc., Bermuda Dunes, California, to
Vintage Associates, Bermuda Dunes, California (Contract
Nos. C20992, C22861, C23040A, and C23620 .
3
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Contract Amendment No. 2 to Contract
No. C22690C — Professional Services Associated with Formation of the
University Park Community Facilities District No. 2005-1.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Contract Amendment No. 2 to the subject
contract with MuniFinancial, Temecula, California, in a total amount
not to exceed $6,000 for additional professional services—funds are
available in Trust Account No. 610-0000-228-2100.
H. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Contract Amendment No. 1 to Contract
No. C23340 — Professional Services Associated with Formation of the
Section 29 Assessment District.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Contract Amendment No. 1 to the subject
contract with MuniFinancial, Temecula, California, in a total amount
notto exceed$17,OOOforadditional professional services—funds are
available in Trust Account No. 610-0000-228-2100.
I. REQUEST for Ratification of the Submittal of the Waste Tire Cleanup and
Amnesty Event Grant Application and Adoption of Resolution to Approve
Said Submittal to the California lntegrated Waste Management Board.
Rec: 1) By Minute Motion, ratify submittal of the Waste Tire Cleanup and
Amnesty Event Grant Application; 2)waive further reading and adopt
Resolution No. 06-19, authorizing said application submittal; 3) by
Minute Motion, authorize the appropriation and expenditure of funds
in the amount of $2,854.76 from the Recycling Fund, Account
No. 236-4195-454-3090, for this purpose.
J. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Purchase of Computers for the Institute
For Sales and Service Excellence at Westfield Palm Desert and Operated
by the Center For Training and Development at College of the Desert.
Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Appropriate $35,000 from the Unobligated
General Fund for the purchase of computers; 2) approve funding the
computers in the lab at the Institute For Sales and Service Excellence
operated by the Center For Training and Development at College of
the Desert; 3)authorize acquisition of the computers through College
of the Desert's purchasing process.
4
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the 2006 "Summer of Fun" Concert
Schedule and Attendant Performing Arts Contracts (Nos. C24920A-G).
Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve the proposed line-up for the 2006
"Summer of Fun" Concert Series; 2)authorize the Mayor to enter into
the following performing arts contracts as presented:
a) Susie Hansen Latin Jazz Band - $4,000
b) Denise Cogan - Upstream - $2,200
c) Larry Tuttle - String Planet - $1,600
d) Redlands Symphony Orchestra - $12,000
e) Steve Madaio & Friends - $7,200
f) Derek Davis - Rockit Scientists - $1,700
g) Rick Joswick - The Jumpin' Joz Band -$2,200
Funds in the amount of $30,900 are available in Account
No. 110-4416-414-3061.
L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Fireworks Display Contracts for the
Independence Day Celebration and Final "Summer of Fun" Concert.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the following contracts with
PyroSpectaculars, Rialto, California, for professional staff and
pyrotechnic supplies and services: 1) Contract No. C24930A in the
amount of$30,148 ($7,500 will be paid by the City of Rancho Mirage)
for the annual Independence Day Celebration scheduled to be held
on July 4, 2006; 2)Contract No. C249306 in the amount of$6,148 for
the final "Summer of Fun" Concert scheduled to be held on
August 31, 2006 — funds for the above have been budgeted in
Account No. 110-4416-414-3061.
M. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Out-of-State Travel for the Aspen Accord
2006 Conference.
Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the subject travel to Aspen, Colorado, for
the Mayor and one staff member to attend the 2006 Conference,
March 5-10.
5
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
N. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Out-of-State Travel and Appropriation
Requests for Sister Cities International's 50'h Anniversary Conference.
This item was removed for separate consideration. Please see Section VI I -
Consent Items Held Over for subsequent discussion and action.
O. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
1. Report on Building & Safety DepartmenYs Nomination for Building
Department of the Year bythe California Building Officials Association
(CALBO).
2. Report Concerning Animal Rescue in Emergency and Disaster
Situations.
Councilman Spiegel asked that Item N be separately considered.
Upon a motion by Kelly, second by Spiegel, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the
remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented.
VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
N. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Out-of-State Travel and Appropriation
Requests for Sister Cities International's 50'h Anniversary Conference.
Councilman Spiegel was concerned about the need for six people to attend
the Sister Cities Conference. Although, he understood that a couple of the
people were paying part of their own way.
Mrs. Gilligan responded that staff had the same initial response; however,
the City of Palm Desert was being recognized for having an outstanding
Sister City Committee, and the following representatives were being honored
for their exceptional leadership: Councilman Crites, Visitor Center Manager
Donna Gomez, Committee Members Donna Jean Darby and Rose Mary
Ortega. Therefore, some of the funding was coming from the Sister City
budget, and it was felt the City should be well represented and assist in
paying for the rest of the Committee to participate if they could.
Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the subject request
for six (6) Palm Desert Sister Cities Committee Members, the Visitor Information Center
Manager,and Councilman Crites to attend the 50th Anniversary Conference in Washington,
D.C., July 13-15, 2006; 2) appropriate $5,550 from Account No. 110-4416-414-3126 for
travel costs associated with attendance at the Conference; 3) appropriate $2,100 from
Account No. 110-4110-410-3121 for registration fees for four(4) Palm Desert Sister Cities
Committee Members to attend the Conference. Motion was seconded by Kelly and
carried by 5-0 vote.
6
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
VIII. RESOLUTIONS
A. RESOLUTION NO. 06-20 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL
SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 30795 (Palm Desert
Redevelopment Agency, Applicant).
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No. 06-20. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by 5-0 vote.
IX. ORDINANCES
For Introduction:
None
For Adoption:
None
X. NEW BUSINESS
A. HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REVOCATION OF BUSINESS LICENSE
NO. 05-36543 - HEMPIE'S CANNABIS DISPENSARY (CANNAHELP).
At the reconvening of this meeting at 4:00 p.m., Mayor Ferguson noted that
business license revocation hearings were personat and involved the license
holder, not the general public; this matter was not intended to be a public
hearing. He went on to say that it was reported in the newspaper this
morning that the City Attorney had requested a continuance in an effort to try
to resolve issues concerning Cannahelp. Today City officials met with the
business owner, Mr. Hochanadel, and had a resolution for his concerns.
Therefore, he said the necessity for the revocation hearing was moot, and
it would not be heard at this meeting; Cannahelp could continue doing
business.
There was no consideration of this item and no action taken.
B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS TO
FORM THE ALESSANDRO ALLEY PROPERTY AND BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
Upon inquiry, Senior Management Analyst Martin Alvarez said that a petition
was circulated in December, and 15 of the 22 affected property owners
responded in favor.
7
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
In further response to question, Redevelopment Manager Lauri Aylaian
stated that residential property owners on the other side of the Alley had not
been contacted yet; a key part of the proposed improvement was that no one
piece of residential property was necessary. If the Assessment District is
approved, staff would be contacting residents to find out if they were
interested in willingly selling property to the City that will provide for building
parking area on their side of the Alley. She said for those who were not
interested, City staff would not enter into negotiations to acquire that
property. She further confirmed that the parking configuration would be
perpendicular, which will provide for more spaces. She went on to explain
that the engineering firm selection process was now undenNay, design was
anticipated to begin in 60 days, and it would probably be a year before
construction would begin.
Responding to question about what happened if some of the businesses
didn't want the District, Mr. Alvarez answered that there would be a vote of
the entire District; and if no majority protest existed, all of them would have
to go along with the assessment.
Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution
No. 06-21, initiating proceedings for the formation of the District; 2) Resolution No. 06-22,
describing the proposed improvements and services and approving the Preliminary
Management District Pfan for the District; 3) Resolution No. 06-23, granting preliminary
approval of the Engineer's Report regarding formation of the District; 4) Resolution
No. 06-24, declaring the intention to form the District, the �evy of assessments, the call for
an assessment ballot proceeding to submit to the qualified property owners within such
District the question of levying such assessments and establishing an assessment range
formula for said District, and the levy and collection of annual assessment related thereto
commencing with Fiscal Year 2006/07. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by
5-0 vote.
C. CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION BY THE PARKS &
RECREATION COMMISSION REGARDING DOG PARK ISSUES.
Parks and Recreation Services Manager Janis Steele stated that both the
Parks & Recreation Commission and staff believe there are problems that
need to be addressed in the Civic Center pog Park, which are generally
related to the health, safety, and comfort of Palm Desert's citizens and their
dogs. She said very successful dog parks around the country were
contacted in an effort to find solutions to some of Palm Desert's issues; and
the Commission asked her to investigate feasibility of a card system at Civic
Center Park and to present such a recommendation to the City Council that
this be considered. Four potential options were presented for consideration
in the staff report, in response to concerns by both the Commission and
citizens. Therefore, she said the City Council's direction was being
requested on how to proceed.
8
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
Councilman Spiegel suggested that the issues be considered as two
separate items: 1) Dogs at the Soccer Park; 2) Civic Center pog Park.
City Councilmembers concurred.
Councilman Crites said after receiving the subject staff report, he visited and
walked the Soccer Park on Hovley Lane on three different occasions. He
saw dogs on leashes on two of those visits and saw no dogs off leash. He
also talked to people who were jogging or using the picnic areas there, and
their concern was for dogs being off leash. Therefore, he felt the biggest
issue was making sure dogs are leashed. He found dog excrement on only
one of the three visits made, so he didn't think dogs fouling the footpath
seemed to be an enormous issue there. He pointed out that aside from a
faded sign with some letters missing, the City wasn't doing a very good job
of notifying the public of leash laws. He also suggested putting up a stand
that makes the doggie do-do sacks conveniently available along with a
receptacle for their disposal. He felt this type of action should be taken
before going to the extreme of banning people with leashed pets from a
public park.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly agreed. He related that in many places he's been,
there are such sacks and containers, but he thought the biggest problem
here was dog waste on the fields themselves. He believed it would be
appropriate to prohibit all dogs from the fields, but didn't think it was right to
deny people access to the open area overall; especially given all the
surrounding residential and nice places to walk dogs there.
Councilman Crites asked who did the landscape maintenance in the Soccer
Park Area, and Ms. Steele said it was contracted. He went on to say that the
landscaping around the perimeter path was shoddy, at best, and asked staff
to perform some serious tidying up there.
Councilmember Benson felt that restricting dogs totally would be wrong,
especially with the number of apartments around there.
Mayor Ferguson commented that he'd talked to lots and lots of soccer
parents and asked if they had problems, and he hadn't gotten one yet.
Further, he hadn't received a letter or e-mail or a phone call about any
problems at the Soccer Park, and he wondered where the complaints were
generated.
Ms. Steele responded that she'd spoken with the head of the Youth Soccer
Organization, who she felt received the majority of the complaints. He told
her that before every practice, the volunteer coaches had resigned
9
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
themselves to going over the fields and picking them up before they start to
play.
MR. TERRY SCHUKART, resident of Hovley Lane and member of the
Parks & Recreation Commission, said he jogs in the Park two or three
mornings a week between 6:00 a.m. and 6:45 a.m. He's noticed on each
occasion, around 30 times since middle of last summer, a good number of
people with dogs off leash—early morning seems to be the prime time; he
noted that there were also some people there with dogs on leash. He said
his recommendation to the Commission was to find a way to enforce the
leash law in the Soccer Park. Additionally, he was certain that to some
degree, issues in the Civic Center pog Park were encouraging some people
to go to the Soccer Park with their unleashed dogs.
Councilman Crites observed that Mr. Schukart had provided the window of
violation that needed to be addressed.
MR. SCHUKART added that he'd seen many dogs on leash along the
perimeter of the Soccer Park, and as a resident of that neighborhood, he felt
that was perfectly legitimate. He said owners who let their dogs run loose in
the predawn hours were unable to see where the dogs had defecated, and
the mess was left behind. Having seen this for himself, he brought it to the
Commission as an issue.
Councilman Spiegel noted a recent article in The Desert Sun by a St. Louis
doctor, saying it has been determined that there are 1,407 viruses, bacteria,
parasites, protozoa, and fungi in the world currently, and 58% of them come
from animals. Therefore, he said the idea of dogs being on the soccer field
and not being cleaned up after could really cause a problem for some of our
children. He agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Kelly's wise suggestion to try to
enforce the leash law and to make doggie pick-up bags more readily
available with a specified receptacle for this waste. He also felt Animal
Control should be asked to closely monitor this area, along with proper
signage, including no dogs allowed on the soccer fields. He felt these
measures would likely take care of the problem.
Mayor Ferguson commented that there was a large green belt in front of his
house, and he estimated there were 200 dog walkers in that area each
morning. In his experience, dog owners were the best regulators of other
dog owners, both for issues of leashes and bathroom habits. He said while
the Soccer Park might not be as crowded, his children played in the
aforementioned green belt and hadn't gotten sick from anything yet. He
believed animals and people can coexist; it's the irresponsible dog owners
that are the problem and not the dogs. So he said if there's an issue at the
Soccer Park, the City should begin to address it and do as much as possible
to take care of it and not start with a ban, which would deprive a lot of people
10
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
of the beneficial use of that park. He added that the park was designated for
soccer, but it was also for open space, picnicking, and general recreation.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Kelly's question about animal control
services, Ms. Steele said staff contacted the City's present provider,
Riverside County Animal Control, and they had made a couple of runs past
the Soccer Park regarding this issue. She went on to say that since they've
moved to the Animal Campus, there is a representative designated for
Palm Desert; although, the eight-hour-per-day schedule for that officer is
8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., five days per week. She said the activities included
routine patrols, rescues, cruelty investigations, and court appearances. She
said that resulted in their not being able to patrol around any given area as
many times as they'd like, but there was someone on duty eight hours per
day; emergency response was available for dangerous or loose dogs after
4:00 p.m. each day.
Councilman Crites pointed out that when there's an issue requiring extra
attention from the Police Department, their patrol schedule is adjusted to be
the most effective to resolve it. He asked why the same thing couldn't be
done with Animal Control for the subject problem. Mayor Pro Tem Kelly
agreed.
Mayor Ferguson also noted that one of the staff report's suggested remedies
was deputizing the Park Patrol, and he wondered whether people like
Commissioner Schukart would be eligible candidates for this purpose.
Councilman Crites felt that would place people in an awkward position. He
felt it was one thing for a person to let someone know they were out of
compliance with City ordinance or regulation, but it was quite another to ask
that person to begin issuing citations. He said if he were in that position, he
would be very uncomfortable, having not had adequate training to perform
such a responsibility, let alone the liability issue for the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly related that the City of Alameda, California, has a very
strict leash law. The first offense generated a $50 fine; second offense was
around $100, and the third resulted in a seizure of the dog. For that reason,
he said there were no dogs off their leashes in Alameda.
Councilmember Benson suggested the City's Citizens On Patrol (COPs)
Program look at the issue to see if there was something they could do.
Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, referthe City Council's comments
on dogs at the Soccer Park back to the Parks & Recreation Commission, including better
signage, prohibition of dogs on the soccerfields themselves, and providing doggie pick-up
bags and a specified receptacle for their disposal. Motion was seconded by Kelly and
carried by 5-0 vote.
11
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
Mayor Ferguson said his comments back to the Commission would be to
start out implementing the least restrictive measures first until the problem
is solved.
...............
Councilman Spiegel said while he personally didn't spend much time in the
Civic Center pog Park, he was aware that many of its users were actually
from cities other than Palm Desert; they have both shown up at Parks &
Recreation Commission Meetings and written letters to The Desert Sun
complaining about Palm Desert's Dog Park. He went on to say it was being
overused but was tough to shut down because of the amount of people who
brought their dogs every day.
Councilmember Benson stated that she would oppose instituting a fee to use
the dog park—it was for the community and its visitors—the City's parks were
free for anyone wanting to use them. If there was a problem, she'd like to
see it solved some other way.
Councilman Crites asked how many of the various problems experienced at
the Dog Park could be lessened by additional dog parks in the City, and
Ms. Steel estimated 50%. She agreed that a lot of the issues resulted from
overuse. He called further attention to the proposal of having all who wanted
to use the Dog Park go through the required orientation in order to obtain the
necessary card, pointing out that it would be a burdensome process for many
who come to Palm Desert for a weekend or brief stay.
Ms. Steele said it was an initial proposal, and thought was given to using
some volunteers, some of the current dog park users,to provide orientations
as needed. She agreed it would be difficult, but the intent was to educate
Dog Park users. In response to further question about one violation resulting
in immediate card revocation, she said it wasn't her full intent to be quite that
severe. She had intended to provide some general guidelines, any of the
suggested regulations could be refined.
MS. CONNOR LIMONT, Palm Desert resident and member of the Parks &
Recreation Commission, stated that she was very much involved in bringing
the card system forward, because she takes her own dog to the Dog Park
about five days a week. In her opinion, some of the things going on there
needed to be brought to the City's attention, relating that recently finro dogs
got into an altercation; one of the owners picked up the other's dog and
threw it. She said these types of situations needed guidelines, and there
really weren't any currently; although, most reasonable people would know
that was unacceptable. She said someone who witnessed the incident stood
up and made it so known; however, there are times at the Dog Park when
there are no guidelines—people get out of the car without the dog on a leash,
12
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
some are even without collars or tags. So she said if staff or any other group
was asked to enforce the guidelines,there weren't any. Although there were
signs, people tended to completely disregard them. Even when she
reminded fellow dog owners about the teash law, she was ignored, adding
that she didn't want to enforce it either. In response to question, she agreed
that there didn't seem to be the willingness to ensure compliance with the
existing guidelines, but she added that there were many good people who
used the dog park, obeyed the rules, and were appreciative of the facility.
She said the others just wanted to do whatever they wanted, and she further
agreed that enforcement was necessary there, which is the reason she
proposed the card system in an effort to level the playing field so that the
rules could be enforced.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly commented that he felt the card system would really
be overkill, reminding him of his experience at the telephone company and
those who were more concerned about keeping the tools secure than getting
the necessary work done. He said it would be complicated,time-consuming,
and not a welcoming aspect for the tourists and visitors that were so vital to
the City's well being. He was opposed to both charging to use the dog park
and imposing a complicated system. He related that he's been to the dog
park with his daughter's dog, and there seemed to be a virtual club of those
who used it at the same time each day; they were also good at monitoring
the activity. However, he said if there was a problem with the leash and
collar law,the card wouldn't prevent that, but an Animal Control Officerwould
with periodic visits. Further, he felt that Palm Desert was large enough that
it may be time to add more Animal Control Officers; and he also agreed that
more dog parks were needed in the City.
Councilman Spiegel said one of the problems that wasn't mentioned was
people coming to the Dog Park to drop off their dog off and then go
shopping,which was a particular problem on Street Fair days. He said it was
a real concern, noting that when the Skate Board Park was built,the decision
was made to monitor and control it. He added that there would be a dog
park in Freedom Park when it is built and agreed that even more dog parks
could be put in, but they have to be maintained. He didn't have a specific
answer to the problem but felt there needed to be more control than there
was currently; he wouldn't be very happy if he had a dog and there were
other owners coming to the Park with their unvaccinated and unlicensed
dogs.
Councilman Crites observed that one issue was that the City needed to look
for some alternate locations—dog parks don't take much land, and maybe
they could be incorporated into existing area. Secondly, he agreed with the
Commission's recommendation to create a"Pooch Park Guide Book,"which
could be made available with the same kind of signage used in National
Parks or other similar venues that alert the visitor they are responsible for
13
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
knowing the regulations. And he agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Kelly that if
more people were needed around the Dog Park to enforce the rules, it
should be so, which would give a greater level of comfort to those using the
Park. He fu�ther agreed that educating Park users was a good idea, but
forcing them to have a card may just move them and their problems outside
the park gate into a different part of the City. In some respects, he felt it was
better having those people at the Park and educating them on the issues to
achieve good compliance.
Councilmember Benson agreed, adding that she liked the idea of a rack with
brochures that could be picked up at the Park, as well as the idea of putting
on more officers to monitor activity there.
Mayor Ferguson said he, too, concurred with most of the comments,
believing a sign to notify owners that all unattended dogs would be
confiscated by Animal Control would take care of the weekend shoppers. He
observed that for both the Soccer Park and Civic Center pog Park, there
seemed to be a problem, and residents were pretty good about (etting the
City Council know when there was one—he had not heard from eitherthe Dog
Park or Soccer Park people, while the previous Palm Desert Youth Soccer
League President had no trouble letting him know whenever the grass was
too long or when there was litter in the parking lot. He preferred having staff
take a real careful look at what the problem was, its extent, and how it could
be addressed with the least restrictive measures, after hearing his
colleagues say they liked the City's parks open, unrestricted, and free for use
by anyone living or visiting here. He felt that principle should be maintained
and applied to this issue. Upon inquiry, he felt this matter should also be
referred back to the Parks & Recreation Commission for further
consideration.
Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, referthe City Council's comments
on the Civic Center pog Park back to the Parks & Recreation Commission, including
emphasis that the least restrictive measures be considered first: a) better signage
indicating the rules and suggested "Pooch Park Guidelines"; b) monitoring Park activity at
specific times and implementing Animal Control enforcement as needed; c) investigate
locations for more dog parks throughout the City. Motion was seconded by Benson and
carried by 5-0 vote.
D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT
MANAGEMENTAND ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES(CONTRACT
NO. C24940).
Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion,approve the subject agreementwith
Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc., Indian Wells, California, to provide
project management and engineering support services in an amount not to exceed
14
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
$100,000, and authorize the Mayor to execute same — funds are available in Account
No. 110-4300-413-3010. Motion was seconded by Ferguson.
In response to question, Mr. Greenwood said it was difficult to get engineers
because the profession wasn't as popular currently. He added that the
technology boom soaked up all the good engineers into the electronics and
computer fields, leaving those with expertise in other areas hard to find.
Further responding, he answered that more pay would provide a greater
attraction.
Councilman Spiegel said he had no problem supporting this request, but he
felt it was better if they were City employees. Mr. Greenwood offered that
this contract would cover for three existing vacancies in the City's
Engineering Department.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly said he had no problem contracting for services, it
provided more workforce flexibilitywhile these positions were being recruited.
Councilman Crites agreed with both of his colleagues, providing there was
a large enough, qualified, competent core staff, which may be the crux of the
issue. He said without that, it has been the City's practice to contract for
services.
Upon further inquiry, Mr. Greenwood said the duration of the contract was
unspecified, but there was a dollar limit that was expected to last about a
year. He said the City could not hire three engineers for $100,000; the
subject contract would fill in for part of those three.
Mayor Ferguson called for the vote, and the motion carried 5-0.
E. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH
THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE FOR THE REPAIR OF EXPANSION
JOINTS AT THE MONTEREY AVENUE BRIDGE OVER THE
WHITEWATER CHANNEL (CONTRACT NO. C23900B, PROJECT
NO. 643-05).
Mr. Greenwood explained that the bridge had been in place for seven or
eight years, and there had always been the complaint that a significant
amount of tire n.oise was present as vehicles both entered and exited the
bridge. Upon evaluating the structure, it was found the gap between the end
of the bridge and the abutment holding it was wider than it should be.
Therefore, it was both an issue for the structure itself that needs to be
corrected, and it was hoped that this work would somewhat reduce the traffic
noise as well.
15
_ _ _ --
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to execute the
subject Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Rancho Mirage for the repair of
expansion joints at the Monterey Avenue Bridge Over the Whitewater Channel and
appropriate $100,000 from Unobligated Fund 400 to a project account. Motion was
seconded by Benson and carried by vote of 5-0.
F. CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS TO EXPEDITE THE WIDENING OF
MONTEREY AVENUE BETWEEN GERALD FORD AND DINAH SHORE
DRIVES.
Mr. Ortega noted the report and recommendations. He said by going
fonNard with this project, the City will be able to move this part of the project
ahead of the assessment district. He said staff could answer any questions.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly moved to: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No.06-25, pursuant to Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 3.30.070,delegating authority
to the City Manager to make the immediate expenditure of public money in order to
expedite the subject project; 2) by Minute Motion, authorize the City Manager to:
a) Negotiate a construction contract up to $500,000 for construction of the water line and
widening of the subject roadway (Contract No. C24950A); b) enter into the necessary
agreements with Southern California Edison Company and pay the associated fees and
costs for relocation of the electrical transmission lines (Contract No. C24950B); c) enter
into related construction contracts as necessary. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and
carried by 5-0 vote.
In answer to question, Mr. Greenwood said he understood Lowe's was
holding a soft opening on March 14.
XI. CONTINUED BUSINESS
None
XII. OLD BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
LANDSCAPEAGREEMENT, REFLECTINGACHANGE IN PLAN FORTHE
REDEVELOPMENT OF WESTFIELD SHOPPINGTOWN PALM DESERT
(CONTRACT NO. C16920A).
Mr. Ortega noted the report and that it represented a change in the schedule
included in an existing agreement. He called attention to the report's
depiction of the area where landscaping would be delayed.
Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve of the proposed
amendment to the subject Landscape Agreement with Westfield Corporation to reflect the
change in plan to the redevelopment of Westfield Shoppingtown Palm Desert. Motion was
seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote.
16
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NOS. 1
AND 2 FOR CONTRACT NO. C228706 — CONSTRUCTION OF THE
PORTOLA AVENUE BRIDGE OVER THE WHITEWATER CHANNEL.
In answer to question whether these items were related to the recent girder
collapse, Mr. Greenwood said they were not. He went on to say the subject
request represented extra traffic control requested by the City after seeing
how things were operating and its desire to keep traffic flowing. Additionally,
he said there were unknown subsurface structures that were found as soon
as they began excavating the site. Further, he said the second Change
Order was actually a credit back to the City for work that will not be
performed.
Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the following Change
Orders to the subject contract with Granite Construction Company, Indio, California:
1) No. 1 for traffic control and demolition in an amount not to exceed $80,000; 2) No. 2 for
a change in the relocation of telephone conduits for an estimated credit to the City in the
amount of$134,157. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote.
XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR THE
WESTERLY PORTION OF GREENE WAY(Continued from the meetings of
January 12, and February 9, 2006).
Mr. Greenwood explained that residents in the subject area requested a
change to the street names in order to improve deliveries to their properties
as well as emergency access. He called attention to the map on the last
page of the staff report that illustrated the recommendation. Responding to
question about reimbursing the church, he said the funds would be used to
reimburse for actual costs in changing their stationery, web site, etc., up to
$1,600.
Upon inquiry, Mr. Erwin affirmed that it was possible for the City to make
such a reimbursement.
Mayor Ferguson declared the public hearing to be �en and invited testimony
SUPPORTING or OPPOSING the street name change.
MS. LORI GAGNON, resident of Edgehill Drive, said she was here for the
second time to support the name change for Greene Way. She asked that
if there were any further issues with the other two streets that were now part
of this matter, that at least the Council act upon the Greene Way name
change, as she and her neighbors were all in limbo between Edgehill and
Willow since they really don't have street addresses that will work; the mail
17
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
doesn't get delivered to them, and emergency services can't find them.
Therefore, they strongly encouraged the change to Tierra del Oro.
With no further public testimony offered, Mayor Ferguson declared the public
hearing closed.
Councilman Spiegel moved to : 1) Waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No. 06-26, approving a street name change for the westerly portion of Greene Way to
Tierra del Oro and designating Vista de Flores and Tanque de Agua Road as street names
for the roadways leading to the southeasterly two homes in the area; 2) by Minute Motion,
approve reimbursement to Desert Cities Baptist Church for costs associated with the name
change; 3) by Minute Motion, appropriate a not to exceed amount of$1,600 for said costs.
Motion was seconded by Benson.
Mayor Ferguson said he was troubled by the $1,600 reimbursement to
Desert Cities Baptist Church. He wondered if anyone else was being
reimbursed for changing their letterhead.
Mr. Ortega replied that staff had a specific reason for recommending the
reimbursement,which was due to a situation being caused by the City; it was
not a gift. Mr. Greenwood added that the church was satisfied with the street
naming as it currently exists, and although not adamantly opposed to the
change,asked that they be reimbursed for their costs for reprinting literature,
changing their website, etc.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly felt it was a reasonable request.
Mayor Ferguson called for the vote, and the motion carried 5-0.
B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM S.I. (SERVICE
INDUSTRIAL)TO PR-13(PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, 13 UNITS PERACRE),
A PRECISE PLAN/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,AND TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TO CONSTRUCT 247
RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON A 20-ACRE SITE AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF GATEWAY DRIVE AND 35T" AVENUE
(73-600 35T" AVENUE) — PROJECT INCLUDES A HEIGHT EXCEPTION
FOR ROOF ELEMENTS TO A MAXIMUM OF 34-FEET 6-INCHES
Case Nos. C/Z 05-03, PP/CUP 05-22, and TT 34179 (Summit Properties,
Applicant) (Continued from the meeting of January 12, 2006).
Planning Manager Steve Smith reviewed the report, noting that the 20-acre
site was currently vacant, with significant slope from south to north and
southwest to northeast. On the westerly side, it was bounded by the
commercial developmentthat includes Sam's Club and WalMart;to the north
and east is Service Industrial, with properties on both sides currently under
18
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
development. Presently, the site is zoned Service Industrial (S.I.), and the
2004 General Plan Update designated it residential, medium-high, so the
range is 4-22 units. He said the Applicant proposes to amend the zoning
from S.I. to Planned Residential, 13 units per acre, thereby making the
property consistent with the General Plan. Further, the Applicant seeks
approval of a Precise Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Height Exception, and
Tentative Tract Map for 247 condominium units. He said on December 6,
the Planning Commission recommended approval on a 4-0-1 vote; the
Commission did have questions regarding the amount of on-site recreation
and parks area, which the Applicant explained had, for the most part, been
placed at the center of the site. He reported that due to the slope condition,
the site plan required such a configuration,which includes a large pool area,
clubhouse facilities, and further details could be obtained within the staff
report. He went on to say that the Commission also discussed at length the
requested height exception, and the general consensus was that it was
warranted due to the location,surrounding uses,topography, and the project
design; further details of this discussion were available in the Planning
Commission Minutes attached to the report,as were the Architectural Review
Commission's (ARC) Minutes on this project. He said the project was
recommended for approval by Architectural Review prior to Planning
Commission's consideration. He related that the site plan, parking, and
architecture, had all been deemed acceptable; the architecture required the
height exception—two-story buildings with some 60-70 of the units having a
loft unit above, creating heights from 28-34 feet. He said ARC felt the
architecture was improved with the loft units; other considerations were that
due to the slope of the area, much of the site is below street level, site being
surrounded by S.I. and Commercial, and lastly, there would be no impacts
to surrounding properties due to the height.
With regard to energy efficiency, he said the Applicant had his engineerwork
on those issues, and they now confirmed that the units will be between
10.8%and 20.9% above the new Title 24 requirements, depending upon the
floor plan and the locations of the units. Units in the project will also comply
with the updated energy requirements provided bythe City's Office of Energy
Management, and the Applicant has also agreed to additionally install
photovoltaic panels on the roof of the model units; all units will be pre-wired
to accept the panels, and the panels will then be marketed to purchasers as
an option. He said the Office of Energy Management expressed support for
this program.
Mr. Smith further explained that pages 8, 9, and 10 of the staff report
reflected the high-density review criteria issues. He said these units will all
be condominiums, so they will be home ownership. Regarding convenient
access to public transportation, he said Condition No. 12 was being
proposed for addition to Resolution No. 06-27, which requires a bus turnout
and shelter on Gateway Drive. He said the site is in close proximity to
19
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
schools, parks, and community services, and staff felt that as designed, the
project helps to address housing needs for moderate-plus buyers, given the
housing prices in the area, and after analyzing it, staff agreed with the
ApplicanYs proposal for how to keep unit costs to the minimum. He went on
to say that Condition No. 9 in the Resolution was also being amended to
require that the Applicant enter into a Housing Agreement with the City to
make 20% of the units available to the Housing Authority at a specified price
based on the December 15, 2005, Proforma,with the intent that the Housing
Authority may write down mortgages to make these units available to
moderate income households and apply resale controls to keep them
affordable into the future. He offered to answer questions.
Responding to question about an analysis on energy efficiency, Mr. Smith
said there was a letter from Aero Energy included in the report.
Mayor Ferguson urged staff to include an eighth step in their high-density
bonus analysis to address energy efficiency, adding that the high-density
bonus criteria in the subject report was very good.
Mayor Ferguson declared the public hearing o en and invited testimony
SUPPORTING or OPPOSING the proposed project.
MR. STEVE LEVENSON, representing the Applicant, Summit Properties,
said he'd had the opportunity to address the project with City
Councilmembers, and he hoped they'd since been able to review the staff
report and drawings that had been modified since he'd met with some of the
Council previously. He went on to explain that his company was very
sensitive to the City Council's concerns on various issues and felt they had
been addressed, as follows:
— Density of the Project— provided an open space plan to show that the site
is covered by 33% with buildings, balance being landscaping and paved
areas. A number of those paved areas could now be considered heavily
landscaped areas, with the garage lanes that have been widened to
accommodate large canopy trees. Pretty major modifications were made
throughout the site to accommodate making the garage lanes more public
spaces with these trees.
— Project complied with criteria for the high-density overlay.
— Affordability has been addressed with specific measures, but it was also
felt that the entire development could be considered such, with anticipated
sales prices lower than the bulk of what the market is currently charging.
Although they felt the entire project was affordable, agreed to enter into the
Housing Agreement for 20% of the units.
—Energy Efficiency—Most of the units exceed the new Title 24 requirements
by a substantial percentage. The worst-located unit as far as windows and
glazing still exceeds Title 24 by 10.5%, with others ranging up to 21%; the
clubhouse is actually 29%. They have also agreed to the other standards
20
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
imposed by the Office of Energy Management and the updated energy
standards. The entire project would be wired for photovoltaic panels and will
provide the panels on the models to give people an idea of what they look
like and see the meter going backwards; materials will be generously
provided in order to market that feature to the best of their ability.
— Slope / Heights of Buildings — Liked the slope aspect of the site and plan
to take advantage of it by stepping the buildings down the hill to create a nice
elevation, keeping in mind that there were tilt-up concrete buildings on three
sides of their project, two immediately adjacent. Site is below street level by
eight to 12 feet in various locations, leading them to believe the heights of
their buildings are reasonable. Of the 247 total units, about 65 of them have
the loft feature, approximately 15% of the roof area, and they were typically
located in the back of the building—not along the streets or interior drives. It
was incorporated to enhance the look of the buildings and because of the
lowered grade level, realizing up front that building height was an issue in
Palm Desert.
— Recreation Area—Currently propose finro areas, one in the center and one
in the northeast corner of the property that will consist of basketball and
volleyball on the opposite side. Intent was to create a place of being,
somewhere everyone would like to go, placed in the center for that reason.
Additionally, because of the slope conditions, it was the most logical place;
the clubhouse is about 12 feet higher than the pool location, with a series of
tiers dropping down. Both the pool (4,300 square feet) and the clubhouse
(7,000 square feet)would be very large—typical pool was around 800 square
feet. There is also a putting green, tot lot, cabana building, all concentrated
in one place as opposed to scattering them and placing them closer to the
building areas,which was impractical given the slope. The recreation center
area was about 400 feet from anywhere on the site.
Councilman Spiegel felt the tot lot was a very good feature. He asked if
there were any plans for providing a preschool.
MR. LEVENSON said that was a consideration; but iYs not a very large site,
nor do they anticipate that many children to warrant an on-site preschool. In
further response, he said if the need presents itself, they could use part of
the 7,000 square foot clubhouse.
Councilman Spiegel went on to say that the added volleyball and basketball
court was also a great feature. He asked if it might be duplicated on the west
side of the project.
MR. LEVENSON said the primary reason they decided to locate the court in
the northeast area was because it was also the location of an underground
retention area, making it land that could not be used otherwise. Further,
basketball tends to be a noisy sport, and they tried to locate it in an area
where it would not be obtrusive to some of the neighbors. Upon question
21
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
about when they intended to start building the project if it is approved, he
said they already had working drawings in process, with plans to be into the
City for a grading permit within the next 30-40 days, and commencement of
construction in early summer.
W ith no further public testimony offered, Mayor Ferguson closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Benson said she didn't have any specific problems with the
project, felt the location of the lots justified the height exception, which she
was always concerned about in this area of the City. She thought it was a
good project and what the City envisioned during the General Plan Process.
Mayor Pro Tem Kelly noted that he was very adamant about having the high-
density criteria, and it looked like this Applicant had met them. He also noted
the comment about the bus route, after yesterday seeing a preliminary future
bus route that will be established within a year—going down Monterey, within
walking distance of this project. Also liked the recreation area being within
400 feet of any resident. Felt the Applicant had done a good job.
Mayor Ferguson commented that this was the third project considered with
application of the high-density bonus; the first received was the inaugural
review, the second was a little different (the City actually required the high
density), leaving this one as the first full fledged project with an existing set
of criteria. He felt it worked so well, it took all of the City Council's job out of
it, and made it easy to review projects like this one. He thanked the
Applicant for an excellent project.
Councilmember Benson moved to waive further reading and: 1) Pass Ordinance
No. 1110 to second reading, approving Case No. C/Z 05-03; 2) adopt Resolution
No. 06-27, approving Case Nos. PP/CUP 05-22 and TT 34179, subject to conditions, and
those added and amended at this hearing. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried
by 5-0 vote.
C. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CEQA (CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT) FINDINGS AND THE COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE
SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/NATURAL COMMUNITIES
CONSERVATION PLAN (CVMSHCP/NCCP) IMPLEMENTATION
AGREEMENT AND ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION FEE.
Following is a verbatim transcript for Public Hearing C.
22
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
�
JF Jim Ferguson, Mayor
RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk
RSK Richard S. Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem
PD Philip Drell, Director of Community Development
RAS Robert A. Spiegel, Councilman
IE Israel Esmeralda, Sr., resident of Thousand Palms
DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney
JMB Jean M. Benson, Councilmember
BAC Buford A. Crites, Councilman
.............................................................................................
JF The next item involves the Coachella Valley Multi-Species Plan. I do represent
developers that are trying to work with CVAG on that plan, so I have a conflict and,
by law, have to leave the room. I'm going to turn it over to Mayor Pro Tem Kelly and
give him the one blue card I received on this.
RDK The last motion carries by unanimous vote.
RSK Thank you. Guess we'll start with staff report.
PD You have the staff report. Basically, the...you know, this is a program that I
remember I started with it in 1994, and people joked in 1994 that surely we weren't
going to take the 10 years that San Diego took to get it approved. And they were
right. It didn't take us 10 years, iYs taken us 12 years, and, as you probably heard
in the newspaper some of the, you know, it's not over yet. Basically, the plan is to,
you know, building on the concept that we used to create the Habitat Conservation
Plan for the Fringe-toed lizard, is to designate areas throughout the Valley that
contain habitat for endangered or sensitive species of both plants and animals,
creating an approximately 750,000 square foot preserve system of which, most of
which is actually in public ownership but will require significant expenditures for
acquisition of more habitat. Again, this is a plan, as I say at the end of the staff
report, which not only wilt go to a great extent to protect the unique animals and
plants in the Coachella Valley, but I think will protect the entire environment for both
the plants and inhabitants of this Valley. IYII, it'll preserve the essential character
of this Valley as a desert, that when you drive over the San Gorgonio Pass, you'll
finally realize you've left Los Angeles, because you will still see the desert.
So...given the fact that...because of some of the negative reaction from some of the
cities, and the fact that the final draft of the Plan approved by CVAG is actually not
yet available, we're requesting a continuance...to the 9th. But in concept, again, I
believe this is something the City should be very supportive of. This, again, helps,
I believe, all the cities to preserve the character and the quality of our lives.
RSK Council have any questions for staff?
RAS I have one. Any reason why we can't approve it tonight?
23
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
PD Because the CVAG documents haven't been transferred to us from their approval
on the 9`h, in terms of they...
RAS If inemory serves me...
PD ...they haven't published the...final draft.
RAS ...one of the other cities out here in the Valley has approved it, as I understand.
PD We...you can vote on it, and I'll, you know, so in terms of, on, you can go on record
of...of approving it, and, but we'll have the...the actual...final, there's...there's an
ordinance, which again, has not been, you know, I don't know how they approved
the implement-, implementing ordinance, because it, it has some major problems
with it that had to get corrected. So...but...you can...by Minute Motion...act on it,
and...and, we'll be producing the final documents on the gtn
RSK Well...all right if I ask a question? Somebody else have a question before...my
question is...it's going to probably...there's probably going to be some changes yet...
PD Correct.
RSK So it seems to me we can...we can act on it tonight, and...and...there's going to
be...you would have to come back with changes anyway.
PD Correct.
RSK Okay, that was my question.
PD So, by...Minute Motion, you can...express your support for the Plan.
RSK Are there any other questions for staff? Question? If there are no other questions,
I'll open the public hearing, and I have...lsrael Esmeralda Senior would like to
speak.
IE Hello. My name is Israel Esmeralda Senior from Thousand Palms. And I'm here
for one purpose tonight. There's a lot of issues that I'd like to discuss, but I'll leave
it for other meetings. But tonight, I would like to thank the City of Palm Desert for
doing a very good job right now, because within this month, you've published two
legal notices, notifying the community here, the public, about a very important issue
that's up ahead of us. And...anytime that I see our political leaders take the time
and effort to notify us on pending issues like this, you have my support. We will
disagree with you on many issues;there's a lot of issues in this problem with CVAG
that we disagree with, but I have to say the public, and I, myself, support it because
you do allow us to participate; you notified us. And, to me, thaYs very important,
and I support all of you for now. Thank you. That's what I wanted to say.
24
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
RSK Thank you. Anyone else like to speak on this issue? Seeing none, Council...
RAS I see no reason why we can't give direction that we agree with the Multi-Species
Habitat Program, and if it's changed, it'll come back to us. But just to go on record,
so with that, I will move to adopt it.
DJE Could I make a suggestion, perhaps? I have no problem with your motion, I would
ask that you include in that a continuance of this hearing, since iYs still open,to your
March 8th meeting...your March 9th meeting, with the idea that the final documents
will be back to you so that you can then approve the required ordinance that goes
along with it.
JMB I'll second your motion.
BAC If I could make a couple of quick comments, because I've spent a fair chunk of...
RSK We'd be disappointed if you didn't.
RAS Yes, we would.
BAC Well, I've spent a couple of years interested in this project. And to start, I think this
is a job of...l agree with what Phil said about it changing the future of our Valley in
terms of the landscape and what people will see. But at the center of this is biology;
and iYs driven by biology, and the areas that are set aside are set aside because
of biological values, and that ends up doing some good open space things. And it's
remarkably disappointing to me to find the number of people who are out involved
in what, I guess, could be characterized as the fraudulent politics of fear, and
spreading rumor, innuendo, and, in many cases, absolute falsehoods...to serve
some very specific supposed needs of...of a couple of individual projects. And then
to call the process of talking about the consequences of passing and not passing
something "extortion," is, I think, incredibly unfortunate. I think every time we sit
here or any other city sits and makes policy decisions, we always know there are
consequences. And in most cases, some of them are positive and some of them
are negative; and to point out that approving this or not approving this has real
consequences about ourfuture in this Valley is not extortion, it's simply pointing out
the reality that people have known for the iast 10 years. And especially, I just want
to take a second to say something that I've thought about, and I just want to say it--
and that is that to say that local officials are lacking in ethics because they talk
about the responsible consequences of passage and not passage is, to me, the
most tawdry, political theater designed for political advantage, and I think it's
shameful. And I think iYs especially shameful coming from my State Senator, who
has had problems with understanding the word "ethics"from the day he was elected
and ended up having his hotel room paid for by lobbyists, and got suits from
lobbyists, and continues through the process of ending up trying to solicit contracts
from Native American Tribes while sitting on committees that regulate them. And
for someone who has had those issues and who has been firmly ensconced in the
25
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
troughs of special interests in Sacramento to come and talk about local elected �
officials and ethics is, to me, an appalling thing to see and hear. And I think the
folks who've worked hard on this, and not myself, but the staff and other people
around this Valley have done us all an incredible service, and I hate to see it
tarnished.
RSK Councilmember Benson, did you finish?
JMB I seconded his motion, as Dave suggested.
RSK I'd like to make a comment. I think there's been, we've seen a lot of negative
comments from other cities in the newspaper, and I think about all the people that
have worked really hard on this for several years, and including our colleague, and
I'd like to thank them for doing that and CVAG. And I think it would be good for us
to pass the motion to show our support so that there's something...some city, at
least, is doing something positive. So I support the motion, and I hope...did you
make it strong enough so that...
BAC Yu p.
RAS About as strong as I could.
BAC Mayor Pro Tem, I'd also note that...that there's a comment that some cities are
favorable to this, because, you know, we don't have anything to lose, and
I...knowing how long a number of my colleagues have been seated at this table,
they'll rememberthat 20 years ago,we put together a Habitat Conservation Plan for
the Fringe-toed lizard, and most of the lands conserved are directly to the north of
our City.
RSK In our sphere of influence.
BAC Yup, and could have been, at some point, annexed, built, and everything else...
RSK A lot of property is still in our sphere...
BAC A huge chunk of that was out there for us...
RSK ...sphere of influence.
BAC ...so I think we have made, 20 years ago, a significant contribution to the bank of
conservation that allowed development to go forward all over this Valley. And I
would hope the people who are now looking at issues about what will or won't
happen recognize that some of us have already done that, will continue to do
everything we can, but we're not proposing this simply because it's in "our interest;"
iYs in our Valley's interest.
26
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
RAS Well I think you also might want to mention, Councilman Crites, the millions of
dollars that we've spent in this City buying land on the west side of Highway 74 so
that it was never developed. And I don't know how many million there are, maybe
our City Manager can remember, but it was many millions of dollars that we spent
buying land so it was never developed on the west side of Highway 74.
BAC And on the east side at the south end of our City.
RAS And the east side of the south end of our City, thaYs correct.
JMB Well I think they're also overlooking the fact that we're making it easier for them all
instead of more difficult, and going their lone, going on their own alone to try to do
some of these things, they'll find out it's a long, long road.
RSK Is there any need to restate the motion? We have a motion,would you please vote.
RDK Motion carries, 4-0, with Mayor Ferguson ABSENT.
BAC I will go retrieve...
RSK Abstaining, oh, yeah, thaYs right, absent.
BAC ...the Mayor.
RSK Okay, you going to call the Mayor back in here?
For purposes of clarification, the following action was taken:
Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1)Endorse the Coachella Valley Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Communities Conservation Plan as currently
drafted; 2) continue the public hearing and presentation of the final documents for the
implementation agreement and ordinance to the meeting of March 9, 2006. Motion was
seconded by Benson and carried by 4-0 vote, with Ferguson ABSENT.
27
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
D. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT TO ALLOW THE
SUBDIVISION OF 11.87 ACRES INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR (4) SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ADJACENT TO
THE "CANYONS AT BIGHORN GOLF CLUB," WEST OF INDIAN COVE
AND SOUTH OF DEAD INDIAN CREEK; AND CONSIDERATION OF
REQUEST ON THE SAME PROPERTY FOR A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (STUDY ZONE) TO
HILLSIDE RESERVE AND ZONE CHANGE FROM A COMBINATION OF
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, FIVE (5) UNITS PER ACRE AND HILLSIDE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL,TO HILLSIDE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL ON THE
ENTIRE PROPERTY Case Nos. TT 31676. GPA 6-1, C/Z 6-1 (Cornishe of
Bighorn, LLC, and City of Palm Desert, Applicants).
Following is a verbatim transcript for Public Hearing D.
�
RSK Richard S. Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem
RAS Robert A. Spiegel, Councilman
PD Philip Drefl, Director of Community Development
RDK Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk
JF Jim Ferguson, Mayor
PJ Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner
BAC Buford A. Crites, Councilman
PP Patrick Perry, Attorney with Allen Matkins, on behalf of Cornishe of Bighorn
.............................................................................................
RSK Okay, you going to call the Mayor back in here?
RAS While we're waiting for him, has this gone before the Planning Commission?
PD We...for reasons maybe Mr. Crites can explain, have simultaneously scheduled
these together with the City Council and the Planning Commission on consecutive
meetings, and so...
RSK (Unclear)
RAS No, I just wondered what the vote was at the Planning Commission.
PD No, no, they continued it also, so we're recommending continuance here and...but
before it comes back to you, hopefully, we'll have a recommendation, after the
continuance, we'll have a recommendation from the Planning Commission.
(Unclear)...
RSK We have a map here...
28
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
RDK It's at that control, I think that's been messed with,evidently, because the brightness
has...has been altered.
JF Our last public hearing of the evening, "Consideration of a request for approval of
a tentative tract map and environmental impact report to allow the subdivision of
11.87 acres into seven lots."
PJ Yes, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, this property is located in between the
Canyons at Bighorn project and the Bighorn Sheep fnstitute. It's approximately 12
acres and about a quarter mile west of, excuse me, east of Highway 74 and
surrounded by a 400-yard buffer that was instituted as part of the mitigation for the
Canyons project from the bighorn sheep pens, the captive breeding pens on the
site. The initial application was for a 57-unit project that did not meet the current
zoning on the property, so it was scaled back to a 38-unit project, and thaYs when
the EIR was prepared forthe 38-unit project. The EIR also studied an 8-unit project
and a 10-unit project also. Now the 38-unit project and an 8-unit project, and later
a 4-unit project that's before you tonight, all...(unclear)...and develop the five-acre
plateau area within the 12-acre piece of property (shown in that area). The...EIR
found that there were significant, unavoidable, environmental impacts with both the
38-unit project and the 8-unit project, and the only project that was not...could be
adopted was the 2-unit alternative; and that's not being requested at this time. Now
the dark line across that site right there,that's the boundaries of a 2-unit alternative
that would be, could be adopted. The impacts that were identified in the EIR had
to do with air quality, noise,traffic, and biological impacts to the captive sheep at the
Bighorn Sheep Institute. I can kind of...orient you to the site of it, again, a little bit.
The...this is a plateau area, here; this is Dead Indian Creek to the north of the site,
this is Indian Cove Drive over here where the main access would take place in
between two lots. This easement was dedicated as part of the Canyons project to
provide access to this 12-acre piece of property. If the...the 400-yard buffer is
depicted as this line, here, and the 9,500 square foot area that was outside the
buffer is this little triangle, here, which is, as you can see, is within, entirely within
Dead Indian Creek. This area here, outside...the buffer line recommended by the
environmental impact report is elevated above the creek. The site plan is prepared
for this 8-unit, 4-unit alternative before you tonight shows this embankment along
Dead Indian Creek. And this is elevated approximately 20 feet above the creek
bed, and so it also has a slope going down to this area. So this area, here, would
be approximately 20,000 square foot pad; and thaYs comparable to these
homesites also within the Canyons adjacent to it. As we were saying, there's...the
EIR recommends this buffer line, here, but there's no project before you, or has
been submitted that meets this...recommended buffer by...by the, from the
consultants have prepared the EIR. As you have all received...information from the
Applicant on this project, and contained within that information is criteria relative to
our takings ordinance that we had recently adopted. And as you can see, if we
adopted the 400-yard buffer line, that would pretty much wipe out all development
on the property. And as you remember, when the Canyons was approved, there
was a separate Settlement Agreement that took place with that project that said that
29
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
we would look at this project separately, and we would not impose, we were not
imposing that 400-yard buffer on this property, and we would look at this project
separately. As you know,we're...recommending continuance item, continuance on
this item tonight to study this no impact alternative a little bit further, and also to
allow the City Attorney more time to review the...information relative to the takings
claim, and also some more time...for the consultants to respond to the comments
that were done on the EI R. The consultant,the biologist representing our consulting
firm is here tonight to answer any kind of biological questions that you have on the
project, and staff is also ready to answer any questions that you have concerning
the project.
PD If I could add one more thing, in that we are in discussion with representative of
California Fish&Game and U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service, and the Bighorn Institute...
to, at least, get from them...a kind of a, contrary to what they indicated in their
comments, I think we were able to convince them that...some degree of
encroachment into the buffer area...was going to be required to...resolve this issue.
And so we're in discussion with them to come up with what we feel is a reasonable
project that meets their requirements. Hopefully, we'll have responses from that at
the...next meeting.
JF Mayor Pro Tem Kelly.
RSK Why did we schedule that so close with the Planning Commission on Tuesday and
then two days later we have it?
BAC I had asked to look at it having to do with the Habitat Conservation Plan when I had
originally thought the HCP, because there are some changes that do and don't
happen with this, if the HCP does and doesn't happen. So that's my fault, Richard.
IYs that simple.
RSK He's taking the blame.
PD Yes.
JF And we got it on tape. Okay, any other questions of staff?
BAC I have, I have a couple of them. When the BLM first...brought the process forward
to...use as a public purpose this land for the Bighorn Institute, there's a statement
in that, that their use with this is compatible with all, I think the proper phrase was,
"The Institute, the project will conform to the logical development of the land and is
compatible with the present and future uses of the surrounding property." Is that
correct?
PJ That's...the finding that BLM made.
30
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
BAC Okay. That's a finding that...that's the finding that predicates the Institute's use of
the land is that they're compatible with surrounding properties.
PJ That's correct.
BAC Okay. And have they, in their correspondence with you on this issue, been
compatible with the uses of the surrounding property?
PJ Of the comments that we received on the EIR, all requested an imposition of the
400-yard buffer on this project.
BAC So that means they are...that they are incompatible with surrounding property.
PJ That's correct.
BAC When you come back at the next hearing, can you tell me what the normal
procedure, then, is when somebody is issued a permit based on compatibility, and
they do not perform under those criteria?
PJ Oh, boy, we can attempt to...find that out. We'll do our best.
BAC I'd appreciate that. Second question. Under our current hillside zoning, how many
units would be allowed on this property?
PJ The proposed, and thaYs why I didn't elude to that earlier, and we have a proposed
general plan amendment - hillside, change of zone to hillside on this proper-,
property also. If the zone change were approved,this would be entitled to two units.
BAC Okay, that would be consistent with the zoning on other, on our hillside zoning
ordinance.
PJ Yeah. You know, unless...some type of exceptions were granted.
BAC Okay. In looking back, as a third question, over the testimony years ago when the
Hayhoe project came, there are a number of comments from biologists, saying that
the minimum buffer should be 600 to 1,200 yards or the sheep captive breeding
program would not be able to continue to exist. They do not have that buffer, has
their program continued to exist?
PJ I'm sorry...
BAC They don't have what the biologists said they had to have.
PJ Oh, thaYs correct, yeah.
BAC And has the program continued to exist?
31
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
PJ Yeah, that program, from all appearances, is going along very successfully with the
400-yard buffer.
BAC Okay. And we don't really know, then, scientifically whether even 400 yards is
necessary, given that, apparently, 600 and 1,200 aren't.
PJ That's what we've received from the...consulting firm is that there's no...scientific
exact number where the impact's going to occur.
BAC Okay. Thank you.
JF Other questions for staff? This is a public hearing, so I'll go ahead and open the
public hearing and receive any testimony, and then we will, perhaps, leave the
public hearing open and continue this matter, as requested. So, public hearing is
open; please step forward to the lectern and give your name and address for the
record.
PP Good evening, Members of the City Council, my name is Patrick Perry, I'm an
attorneywith Allen Matkins. I'm here speaking on behalf of Cornishe of Bighorn,the
owner of the property. My address is 515 South Figueroa Street in Los Angeles,
and I have spoken with all of you and given you some background...as to the nature
of the project and how we actually got to where we are now with the four units. As
Mr. Joy and Mr. Drell both indicated,the project originally consisted,was...proposed
originally to consist of 57 units, which is what we understood to be the maximum
number of units that could be placed on the property under the existing zoning,
which is PR-5 (Planned Residential, 5 units per acre)over most of the property,with
a small portion currently zoned hillside over the 12-acre parcel. And that was
reduced, that proposal was withdrawn following the General Plan Update process
that took place, roughly, concurrently with the submission of that application,
originally, about three years ago. When the Council determined to designate this
property as a Special Study Area within the General Plan, and my understanding
at the time was that the appropriate density for the property would then be
determined on the basis of the tract map as it came forward, and you would allow
that to be the vehicle to determine the appropriate density rather than establish that
through the General Plan Update process. And as I said, the 57-unit project was
then withdrawn; the 38-unit project was then submitted, which looked like that. It
was designed as five residential lots with seven structures, five of which would be
six multi-family units, finro of which would be four multi-family units, required two
means of access for emergency ingress and egress due to the...density on the site.
There's an existing easement of record that comes down from the north, and the
secondary means of access was proposed to be through this street...that comes
from the east, which is on the final map for the Canyons at Bighorn project. The
Canyons at Bighorn representatives then initiated discussions with us. They were
concerned by the fact that the northern access, the easement of record, which was
established back in the 1950s, actually cuts right down through the middle of their
golf course; and they, I think understandably,expressed concerns about that,asked
32
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
us if there was some way that we could try to accommodate those concerns. So we
went and looked and tried to come back with a proposal, which was an eight-lot
subdivision for eight single-family residential units...which was this proposal,
eliminated the northerly access, which came down across Dead Indian Creek,
thereby eliminating some of the...impacts that would have resufted on the
watershed; retained the access from the east. I went to the Fire Marshal to see if
this would be acceptable to the Fire Department, have a singfe means of access for
eight units, and itwas determined bythe Fire Marshal to be an acceptable proposal
as long as we complied with all of the requirements of the Fire Code in terms of the
length of the road, the adequacy of the fire hydrants, fire flow, etc. So we asked for
this to be considered as an alternative in the environmental impact report that was
then prepared for the project in order to determine whether or not there would be
any impacts associated with this project. One of the other concerns that the
Canyons at Bighorn had was that they have no multi-family residential development
within their project, and,therefore,did not want to see multi-family residential on this
property, because it would not be compatible with all the single-family residential
that they have. So that was another measure on their part that we sought to
accommodate by coming up with this particular proposal. It turns out in the
environmental impact report that notwithstanding the reduction in number of units
in what we had hoped to be elimination of any impacts, it was determined there
would still be impacts with the eight-lot subdivision; impacts being, as Mr. Joy
mentioned, traffic, air quality during construction, noise, and biological resources.
The traffic impact was an impact on the streets in the Canyons project. The...EIR
stated that that impact could be eliminated if we were to do five or fewer single-
family residential lots on the property. That's what,then, led to the concept of doing
the four-lot subdivision so that it would eliminate the traffic impact entirely. We
incorporated a number of the measures that applied, as well, to the two-lot
alternative that was also studied, and for which the EIR identified no impacts...and
got to what's before you tonight. The various features that were then incorporated
was not only a reduction in the density but also the relocation of the road so that it
would be shielded by the structures from the views from the Bighorn Institute, from
the lambing pen at the Bighorn Institute. That it would be all passive design, natural
materials, native landscaping, drought-tolerant landscaping, and so forth, which
could all be incorporated into the CC&Rs for the project. All of the mitigation
measures that were proposed are acceptable to us for the construction of the
project, in terms of not performing any construction during the lambing season,from
January to June. We believe that the amount of grading here will be significantly
reduced,thereby reducing the air quality impacts,we hope,to a lessened significant
level, although we haven't done that quantification yet. Also...noise impacts would
be reduced, the period of construction, we feel at least for the infrastructure, the
roads, utilities, and grading, would be less than three months, as recommended in
the EIR. So we have attempted to accommodate the concerns that were identified
in the EIR, as well as the concerns of the neighboring property owners to the extent
that we can and still have,what we feel, is a reasonable level of development on the
property. As I said,we've been in extensive discussions with representatives of the
Canyons. At this point, they're taking whaYs effectively a neutral position, I think,
33
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
with respect to this project; they have not come out and committed to us that they
would be in support of the project, but at the same time, they have not raised any
objections. We've made efforts to meet with representatives of the Bighorn
Institute; we had a meeting scheduled for last Tuesday, which we were not able to
accomplish simply because all of the people weren't able to...convene at the time
that we had planned. But we do have a conference call scheduled for tomorrow
afternoon to try to get their comments. The...brief conversation that I have had with
their counsel...about a year ago or more...was that they would not like to see us
develop any of the property that's within the buffer zone. That would leave us with
a small triangle, as Mr. Drell pointed out, which is up in the corner...completely
within the Creek, and we think completely undevelopable. And, therefore, if we
were precluded from being able to do any development except outside the
designated buffer area, we would be precluded from doing any development at a(I,
and that's what led to the regulatory takings issues that Mr. Drell and Mr. Joy also
eluded to and that we provided information on in the materials that we submitted to
you—that if it completely precludes development on the property,itwould deprive the
prope�ty of all economically viable use, which is, essentially, the legal definition of
a regulatory taking—and that's why we provided that information, as well. And we
also understand that you have in front of you tonight the General Plan Amendment
proposal and the rezoning the property to down-zone it, effectively, to hillside. We
would oppose that designation, because as Mr. Joy pointed out, that would reduce
the available density on the property to no more than two units. The hillside was,
allows one unit per five acres, and on 12 acres woufd be effectively reduced to two
units, and we would prefer to go forward with the four units. We feel that that is a
reasonable level of development. One other issue that I think is worth pointing out
is in the EIR, the biological resources impacts, those impacts were exclusively on
the captive breeding herd at the Bighorn Institute. There were no impacts identified
on free-roaming wildlife, whether it was desert tortoise, burrowing owls, bighorn
sheep, Jerusalem crickets, or any of the plant species that...are currently on the
site. That iYs the operations of the Institute that would be affected and not
necessarily wildlife free-roaming within...the area. I'm available for any questions
that you might have. We do support the continuance for two weeks, and...l
appreciate your time.
JF Any questions for the Applicant? Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anybody
else wishing to address the Council at this time may do so. Seeing nobody, I will
leave the public hearing open and ask for the pleasure of the Council.
BAC (Inaudible)
JF Motion to continue for two weeks by Councilmember Crites.
RAS Second.
JF Second by Councilmember Spiegel. Please vote.
34
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
RDK Motion carries by unanimous vote.
JF Okay, that's the end of our public hearings for this evening. That brings us to
Reports and Remarks, beginning with the City Manager.
For purposes of clarification,the following action was taken:Councilman Crites
moved to, by Minute Motion, continue this public hearing item to the meeting of March 9,
2006. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by 5-0 vote.
XIV. REPORTS AND REMARKS
A. CITY MANAGER
1. Status of the Portola Avenue Bridge at the Whitewater Channel.
Mr. Ortega commented that the City Council should have received a
written report on this matter, and Mr. Greenwood offered to answer
any questions.
B. CITY ATTORNEY
None
C. CITY CLERK
None
D. PUBLIC SAFETY
o Fire Department
None
o Police Department
None
E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
o City Council Rec�uests for Action:
1. Councilman Crites noted the letter recently received from
Universityof California, Riverside, Chancellor France Cordova,
announcing that Vice Chancellor Michael Webster had retired.
He asked that an appropriate letter of appreciation be
forwarded to Dr. Webster for all he had done for the UCR
35
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
campus in Palm Desert and for the collaboration between the
two University Systems here.
2. Councilman Spiegel asked for staff to take immediate action to
improve/increase the amount of directional signage forthe new
Visitor Information Center. He referred to the Center's annual
report, showing that although website hits and overall sales
were substantially increased, there was a dramatic decrease
in walk-in traffic and associated activity. The Visitor Center
was relocated because it was too small and difficult to access.
He felt it was very unfortunate that visitors and residents alike
had a great deal of difficulty finding the new, outstanding
facility.
Redevelopment Manager Lauri Aylaian reported thatthere was
currently a contract in place forthe on-site monument signage.
Visitor Center Manager ponna Gomez said that early on, she
and Mark Greenwood toured all the entrances to the City in
order to address the directional signage, and she asked that
the Center receive top billing on many of those signs. She
said Mr. Greenwood accommodated much of that request
throughout the City, and the signs were installed prior to the
September opening. But it was felt that additional work on the
project was necessary. Additionally, she said she arranged for
some temporary signage at the site until the monument signs
are installed, noting that beforehand as many as 40 people a
day were quite upset because they had a hard time finding the
Visitor Center; the number of complaints was down to about
12/day.
With City Council concurrence, Councilman Spiegel and Mayor Ferguson were
appointed to work with City staff to identify ways that this issue could be resoived.
o City Council Committee Reports:
None
o CitkCouncil Comments:
1. Councilman Crites said he'd just gotten installation of one of
the joint Coachella Valley Water DistricUCity of Palm Desert
evapotranspiration irrigation systems at his residence and was
very excited about it; the device automatically sets itself from
midsummer all through the year. He said the system was
remarkably efficient and anticipated a 30% savings on his
36
PRELIMINARY MINUTES
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2006
water bill. He encouraged his colleagues to also participate
and make Palm Desert's the first City Council to be completely
on board with this program, having obtained four more
applications for his colleagues. He said if once it was installed
the owner decided they didn't like it, the automatic setting
could be turned off, and then it operates just like a regular
irrigation clock. He thanked his colleagues for approving the
City's participation in the program; the Water District reported
that Palm Desert was the number one place for requests to
participate. Upon question, he said the interior-installed unit
cost the homeowner $50, the exterior-installed unit cost the
homeowner $100, with the District/City Program paying the
remaining $50 or $100, respectively. He said it only took
around 20 minutes for the Water District technician to install it.
2. Mayor Ferguson reported that on Tuesday, he'd met with the
new manager of the Super WalMart, Tom Krause. He was
impressed with Mr. Krause's community spirit and enthusiasm.
During the meeting, he also invited City staff to talk with
Mr. Krause about various City programs, and the result was a
pledge to help create a Police Substation in the Super WalMart
and to commit substantial grant funding for the City's
Afterschool Program. Additionally, he wanted to promote Palm
Desert by distributing its various marketing materials at the
store. A grand opening event was being planned for April or
May.
XV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C
None
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Crites, and 5-0 vote of the City Council,
Mayor Ferguson adjourned the meeting at 6:15 p.m.
JIM FERGUSON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
37