HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrelim - CC - 01-24-2013 DRAFT
PRELIMINARY MINUTES � !T
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2013
CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER
73510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260
I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M.
Mayor Harnik convened the meeting at 3:16 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Absent:
Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson Councilman Robert A. Spiegel
Councilman Van G. Tanner
Councilmember Susan Marie Weber
Mayor Jan C. Harnik
Also Present:
John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager
David J. Erwin, City Attorney
Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk
Bo Chen, City Engineer
Russell Grance, Director of Building & Safety
Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development
Martin Alvarez, Director of Economic Development
Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer
Janet M. Moore, Director of Housing
Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works
Frankie Riddle, Director of Special Programs
Stephen Y. Aryan, Risk Manager
Kevin Vest, Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept.
Bill Sullivan, Asst. Chief, Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept.
Michael Bianco, Admin. Sgt., Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept.
Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk
Upon question by Mayor Harnik, Ms. Klassen confirmed that today's meeting
agendas had all been posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
111. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A(CLOSED SESSION ITEMS)
MR. GREGORY M. HATTON, 20281 Birch Street, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA,
an attorney representing Lawrence Pasternack on Closed Session Agenda Item
B. (1) below, noted that he'd just presented City Councilmembers with a binder of
materials that were largely items presented to the Planning Commission with some
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
brief updates to which he called attention. Responding to question, he said most
of the information that the City Council already had in today's agenda packet in a
similar booklet was the same; the new binder provided some updates since the
Planning Commission hearing on December 18, and it also responded to some of
the information brought up for the first time at that Planning Commission hearing.
He recalled for City Council previously being before them on this matter last fall prior
to a Closed Session, begging the City to enforce Bighorn's setbacks. The City
Council decided not to do that; consequently, his client filed a lawsuit arising out of
setback violations on the lot immediately adjoining his in Bighorn, which had been
put under construction prior to his first appearance before the City Council. He said
the Superior Court entered a Preliminary Injunction, stopping construction on that
site due to substantial evidence that building was occurring in the setbacks, and the
City is a part of that. He added that they were concerned because in response to
that lawsuit by one citizen, the only one who's ever complained about a setback
violation at Bighorn in 15 years, the City's response is directed at litigation only for
the purpose of attempting to win a lawsuit. He related that the update most
important in the booklet just provided is the fourth tab labeled, "PC Hearing
Excerpts,"where quotes by Principal PlannerTony Bagato,along with Assistant City
Attorney Hargreaves,are excerpted and give Council the Plaintiff's viewon what are
believed to be highly inaccurate statements about what's driving all of this. He felt
this information was easy to understand, and if someone believes they are being
taken out of context, also included is the Court Reporter's transcript in its entirety,
which his client hired in order to transcribe the proceedings (Exhibit "P" in the new
booklet). He went on to say that this is followed in Section 2, pages 13-14, where
a number of excerpts and admissions relative to the City allowing the HOA to
determine its own setbacks, as well as admissions about the fact that the primary
purpose of the new setback plan is directed at the pending litigation, are provided.
Therefore, the Plaintiff doesn't think for a number of reasons—some legal, some
factual—that a City, which gets sued for, essentially, refusing to enforce its own
setback laws, can respond to that lawsuit by changing the law, making what it's
done wrong in the past legal. He said it wasn't the way the American system of
government was supposed to work, and it wasn't right. He urged Council to take
a close look at the "PC Hearing Excerpts" during Closed Session before it decides
that the recommended course of action is the right thing for government to do. He
reiterated that this was a lawsuit involving finro parcels at Bighorn; the City is a party
to it, and the only conceivable purpose for changing the setbacks from the large
estate-size that they are down to five feet on each side is to exonerate both the
City's Planning Department and Bighorn itself for not enforcing the City's setbacks—
there could be no other purpose. It's admitted to by Mr. Bagato in his statements.
If no one has complained about the setbacks in Bighorn for 15 years, he wondered
why it was all of a sudden now so difficult for Bighorn to comply with them. The
"Deposition Excerpts" in the booklet show that neither Bighorn nor the Planning
Department ever made any good faith attempt to comply with the setbacks at
Bighorn, and that's why they are where they are today. He cautioned that the only
plausible effect of the new setbacks would be to wipe out the claims by one
American citizen that the setback laws have been violated — nothing else needs to
2
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
be changed. He referred to diagrams in the booklet under "Exhibit Tab B," that
show starting in 2002, Bighorn had its landscape architectural consultants create
lot diagrams for the development that are consistent with the current setbacks in
place for 15 years (located on "Table of Development Standards," Tab "A"). He
opined that there was no difficulty or magic in complying with the existing setbacks,
but when compared to the deposition testimony of Bighorn executives(Tab"F")and
City Planners (Tab "H"), it could be found that the reason they didn't comply with
those easily diagramed setbacks for each of the lots was because they didn't want
to. Now, after coming before City Council last fall to implore it to begin enforcing the
City's setback laws at Bighorn, a conscious decision was made not to do that. The
City gets sued, and its response coming out of the Planning Department is to take
care of it by changing the law to get rid of the lawsuit. He didn't think that could be
done.
IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Request for Closed Session:
A. Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8:
1) Property: APNs 624-440-012, 624-440-017, 624-441-007,
624-431-029,624-430-006,624-431-011,624-431-016,
624-440-006,624-430-018,624-440-019,624-431-020,
624-440-008, 624-431-001
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Janet M. Moore/City of
Palm Desert/ Successor Agency to the
Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/
Palm Desert Housing Authority
Property Owner: City of Palm Desert/Successor Agency to the
Palm Desert Redevelopment
Agency/Palm Desert Housing Authority
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
2) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Complex,
73710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite No. 116, Palm Desert
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Paul S. Gibson/City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: City of Palm Desert
Other Parties: Assembly Committee on Rules, State of
California
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
3
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
3) Property: 74-833 Joni Drive (APN 624-071-014), Palm Desert
Negotiating Parties:
Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Martin Alvarez/Ruth Ann Moore/
City of Palm Desert
Property Owner: City of Palm Desert
Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment
B. Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(a):
1) Pasternack v. Fagel, Bighorn, and City of Palm Desert,
Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. INC 1206949
C. Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b):
Number of potential cases: 2
On a motion by Tanner, second by Weber, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with
Spiegel ABSENT, Mayor Harnik adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:27 p.m.
She reconvened the meeting at 4:10 p.m.
V. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M.
A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION.
None
VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA- Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson
VII. INVOCATION - Councilman Van G. Tanner
With City Council concurrence, Mayor Harnik suspended the agenda at this
point in order to take up Section IX - Awards, Presentations, and
Appointments, Items A - C, then returned to Section VI11 - Oral
Communications - B.
VI11. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B
MS. JIMMICA GUESS, on behalf of Martha's Village& Kitchen, Indio, CA, thanked
the City Council for the opportunity to host their Annual Thanksgiving Day 5K on
EI Paseo. She said it was a great success with approximately 1,926 participants
and net proceeds of $71,000, for which they were very grateful. Today she
4
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
requested City Council to ask staff to come up with a long-term agreement for
Martha's Village & Kitchen to use EI Paseo for its Annual 5K event going forward.
Mayor Harnik responded that she attended the event, it was great and very
worthwhile participating.
IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS
A. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE SUPPORT
AND EFFORT OF THE IXTAPA-ZIHUATANEJO SISTER CITIES
ASSOCIATION AND RESIDENTS OF IXTAPA-ZIHUATANEJO TO
ADVANCE THE SISTER CITY AFFILIATION WITH PALM DESERT, AND
REAFFIRMING ITS SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP WITH IXTAPA-
ZIHUATANEJO.
On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the framed
proclamation and a key to the City of Palm Desert to Presidente Municipal
Mr. Eric Fernandez Ballesteros.
With the help of translator and Palm Desert Sister Cities Foundation Board
Member Rose Mary Ortega, Mr. Fernandez Ballesteros responded very
graciously and said that he and the delegation were very honored to be
recognized today and be representing their city. He said even though it was
a relatively small delegation on this trip, they traveled to Palm Desert to
further the Sister City relationship and expressed sincere appreciation for all
the hospitality they'd been shown. He noted that he was also here today
representing a new administration for the City of Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo, and
though it was new, it was even more important for them to come here and
reaffirm the link that has been established. He added that they were also
very appreciative of all that they have received from the Sister City of
Palm Desert. Further, he said there was a great deal of culture in both
communities, and to represent that cultural exchange, he presented Mayor
Harnik and the City of Palm Desert with a bronze statue by a very well-known
and renowned artist from the City of Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo -- a replica of a
sculpture located in the marina there, representing a woman selling fish.
B. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY,
JANUARY 24, 2013, AS "WALMART APPRECIATION DAY" IN THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT.
On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the framed
proclamation to Palm Desert Walmart Supercenter Store Manager
David Murphy and personally extended thanks for his tremendous support
of and enthusiastic participation in the "2012 Shop With A Cop" Program.
5
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
C. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY,
JANUARY 24, 2013, AS"SERGEANT MICHAEL BIANCO APPRECIATION
DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT.
On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the framed
proclamation to Palm Desert Administrative Sergeant Mike Bianco in
appreciation for his coordination and personal involvement in the"2012 Shop
With A Cop" Program.
D. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, DECLARING THURSDAY,,
JANUARY 24, 2013, AS "RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS APPRECIATION DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT.
Representatives from the Palm Desert Fire/Riverside County Fire
Department/Cal Fire were unable to be present for today's recognition. The
framed proclamation will be delivered to them separately.
E. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION, RECOGNIZING KEN SCHWARTZ
FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE AS GENERAL MANAGER OF
J. W. MARRIOTT DESERT SPRINGS RESORT AND SPA, AND HIS
FRIENDSHIP WITH THE CITY OF PALM DESERT.
Mr. Schwartz was unable to attend today's meeting for this recognition. The
framed proclamation will be delivered to him separately.
F. PRESENTATION�TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY QUEEN SCHEHERAZADE
AND HER COURT AS AMBASSADORS OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FAIR AND NATIONAL DATE FESTIVAL, FEBRUARY 15 - 24, 2013.
MS. BARBARA CRESON, just-retired College of the Desert staff member
� and currently serving her eighth year as "Queen Mom" presented the
Queen's Court: MS. MADISON GIVENS, Queen Scheherazade;
MS. LINA EL-MAHMOUD, Princess Dunyazade; and
MS. ABIGAIL BECKERT, Princess Jasmine. Each of the ladies greeted the
City Council and provided background on themselves,and personally invited
them and all present to visit and enjoy the upcoming Fair, February 15-24,
highlighting the many events and activities to be held there this year. They
thanked Councilmembers for the opportunity make this presentation and
provided a supply of brochures for the 2013 event.
X. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 10, 2013.
Rec: Approve as presented.
6
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant
Nos. 138, 142, and 143.
Rec: Approve as presented.
C. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHO�IC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Jensen's
Complete Shopping, 73-601 Highway 111, Palm Desert.
Rec: Receive and file.
D. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Palm Desert
Liquor, 40-205 Washington Street, Suite No. 104, Palm Desert.
Rec: Receive and file.
E. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
1. Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting of December 4, 2012.
2. Youth Committee Meeting of December 3, 2012.
Rec: Receive and file.
F. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Kent Routh - Cultural Resources
Preservation Committee.
Rec: Receive with very sincere regret.
G. AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS for the City of Palm Desert for the Fiscal
Year Ended June 30, 2012.
Rec: Receive and file.
H. AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS forthe Palm Desert Recreational Facilities
Corporation for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012.
Rec: Receive and file.
I. LIMITED PROCEDURES REVIEW of Various Palm Desert Operators for
Compliance with the City of Palm Desert's Transient Occupancy Tax
Ordinance for Calendar Years 2010 and 2011.
Rec: Receive and file.
7
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
J. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Streamline the Use of Vendors for the
Public Works Department by Granting Exception to Bidding Requirements
and Approving the Landscape Services Division's Various Vendors and
Qualified Service Providers List for Fiscal Year 2012-2013.
Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Grant an exception to bidding requirements, as
provided for by Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 3.32.090 for
FY 2012-2013;2)approve the Landscape Services Division's Various
Vendors and Qualified Service Providers List for FY 2012-2013.
K. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Seventh Lease Amendment Between
the Assembly Committee on Rules, California State Assembly, and the City
of Palm Desert to Lease Suite No. 116 of the City of Palm Desert's Parkview
Professional Office Complex.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the subject Lease Agreement and
authorize the Mayor to execute same between the Assembly
Committee on Rules, California State Assembly, and the City of
Palm Desert, for lease of Suite No. 116 at the Parkview Professional
Office Complex.
L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Amendment No. 1 to Vision Service Plan
Agreement to be in Compliance with the Affordable Care Act (2010 Health
Care Reform)by Providing Coverage to Dependants Up to Age 26(Contract
No. C32510).
Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No.
1 to the agreement with Vision Service Plan, providing dependant
coverage up to age 26.
M. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Amendment No. 6 to Contract with Delta
Dental to be in Compliance with the Affordable Care Act(2010 Health Care
Reform) by Providing Coverage to Dependants Up to Age 26 (Contract
No. C27650).
Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No. 6
to the subject contract with Delta Dental, providing dependant
coverage up to age 26.
8
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PA�M DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
N. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF WORK for Contract No. C31670 —
Accessible Pedestrian Signal Project (Project No. 562-12) (PTM General
Engineering Service, Inc., Riverside, CA).
Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the work as complete and authorize the
City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the subject project.
This item continued to a date uncertain.
O. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Security for Precise Plan
No. 06-01 (Vineyards) (Sinatra & Cook Project, LLC, Applicant).
Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the security for Frank Sinatra
Drive Improvements for Precise Plan No. 06-01 (Vineyards).
P. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Release Security for the Ironwood
Country Club Entry at Mariposa Drive (Orr Builders, Applicant).
Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize release of the security for improvements
for the Ironwood Country Club entry at Mariposa Drive.
Q. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Reimbursement of Art In Public Places
Fees in the Amount of$5,992.20 for"Wisdom Given" by Alex Bashta III as
the Public Art Component for the Oracle Plaza Project Located at
73-585 Fred Waring Drive (Shah Family Trust, Applicant).
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the reimbursement of Art In Public Places
Fees in the amount of $5,992.20 for "Wisdom Given" by
Alex Bashta III, the public art component for Oracle Plaza located at
73-585 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert — funds are available in
Account No. 436-0000-228-9900.
R. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the 2013 AEG Amgen Bike Tour of
California.
Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the revised course map for the 2013
Amgen Bike Tour of California as presented.
9
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
S. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Purchase One Satellite Phone, in An
Amount Not to Exceed $1,500, as Part of a FY 2010 Homeland Security
" Grant Program (HSGP) Award.
Rec: By Minute Motion: 1)Authorize the City of Palm Desert's participation
in a FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) Award
Project for the purchase of one Iridium ExtremeT"" 9575 Satellite
Phone and required service agreement; 2) appropriate $1,500 from
the Unobligated General Fund into Account No. 110-4130-411-2191 -
Disaster-Emergency Account, and estimate revenue of $1,500 to
Account No. 110-0000-331-1201 forthis purpose.
T. CONSIDERATION of an Exception to Palm Desert Municipal Code
Section 9.58.010-Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages on Public Property,
for Various Private Events at the Palm Springs Art Museum-Palm Desert
(The Galen) Located at 72-567 Highway 111.
Rec: By Minute Motion, ratify approval of an exception to Palm Desert
Municipal Code Section 9.58.010 - Consumption of Alcoholic
Beverages on Public Property,for various private events, as indicated
in the accompanying staff report's Attachment "A," at the
Palm Springs Art Museum-Palm Desert (The Galen) located at
72-567 Highway 111.
U. RECEIVE AND FI�E Report Pursuant to Section 33080.1 of the California
Health and Safety Code(Joint Consideration with the Successor Agency
to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency).
Rec: Receive and file.
Mayor Harnik stated staff requested that Item N be continued to a date
uncertain.
Upon a motion by Tanner, second by Benson, and 4-0 vote of the City Council with
Spiegel ABSENT, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented.
XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
None
10
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
XIi. RESOLUTIONS
A. RES(JLUTION NO. 2013 - 02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A
DIVISION OF THE PRESENT RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND ALLOWING
EACH ELIGIBLE MEMBERTO ELECT WHETHER OR NOT HIS SERVICES
SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM OR INCLUDED UNDER THE SAID
CALIFORNIA STATE SOCIAL SECURITY AGREEMENT AS
HEREINBEFORE PROVIDED; WITH SUCH "MEDICARE-ONLY"
COVERAGE EFFECTIVE AS A SERVICE PERFORMED ON AND AFTER
JULY 1, 2013 (ALLOWING THE CITY TO REMOVE THE MEDICARE
EXCLUSION FROM CERTAIN EMPLOYEES HIRED BEFORE APRIL 1,
1986).
Human Resources Manager Lori Carney stated this was a technical
resolution that will accomplish a very simple thing. There are a couple of
employees left who were hired priorto April 1, 1986,when Medicare became
mandatory for public employees. Those employees hired prior to that time
are currently not covered by Medicare, and they are not contributing the
1.45% of their salary toward the Medicare system or earning credit in the
system. By passing the proposed Resolution, it will allow the four employees
to have an election and decide if they would like to participate in the
Medicare system. She was aware of at least one employee who was
interested in participating. Federal Law requires a 90-day waiting period
from the date of adoption to hold the election. If the proposed Resolution is
passed,staff will return in four months to actually make the division and allow
those who wish to participate in the Medicare system to be covered by
Medicare. She said this will assist the employee to receive Medicare, and
it will also benefit the City, because it will reduce the eventual retiree's health
care cost.
Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No. 2013-02. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote with Spiegel
ABSENT.
11
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
B. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - 03 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS
RESOLUTION NOS. 03-49 AND 2011-75, ESTABLISHING A
PALM DESERT MARKETING COMMITTEE AND ITS MEMBERSHIP
REQUIREMENTS - ADDING A PROVISION ALLOWING FOR THE
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE MEMBERS TO THE PALM DESERT
MARKETING COMMITTEE.
Tourism and Marketing Manager ponna Gomez stated the proposed
Resolution amends the Marketing Committee bylaws to allow for
appointment of alternate members.
Councilmember Weber moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No. 2013-03. Motion was seconded by Tanner and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel
ABSENT.
XII1. ORDINANCES
A. For Introduction:
None
B. For Adoption:
None
XIV. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF GRANT AGREEMENT WITH
CLIPPERCREEK, INC., FOR UPGRADE OF THE CITY'S ELECTRIC
CHARGING STATION AND AUTHORIZE THAT MSRC GRANT FUNDING
BE REDIRECTED TO IMPLEMENT A COMMUNITY PROGRAM TO
INSTALL ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS/UNITS (CONTRACT
NO. C325201.
Ms. Riddle stated City staff was approached by South Coast Air Quality
Management District(SCAQMD)staff and representative from ClipperCreek,
Inc., to determine if the City was interested in participating in the Reconnect
California Grant Program, which is designed to replace old obsolete electric
charging units. The City expressed interest, and since the City was already
approved for MSRC funding for the same project, staff is planning on taking
the Reconnect California Grant funds to replace the units out at the Parkview
Building and use the MSRC funds to install additional units in the community.
She noted the Council had expressed an interest in working with the
community to expand electric charging infrastructures out in the community.
12
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Simultaneously, the proposed agreement wili also be reviewed by
ClipperCreek, Inc., and Department of Energy(DOE), and if approved by all
agencies, the City will move forward. If for some reason the City Council
approves the agreement, and the other agencies don't, the City will revert
back to the original program and use the funds to update the City's electric
charging infrastructure.
Mayor Harnik stated the staff report indicated that a Level 3 charging unit
took 15-30 minutes to charge. She asked how long it took for the current
ones to charge.
Ms. Riddle responded it took six to eight hours depending upon how low the
battery was, stating the chargers are used when people go shopping or have
lunch. Further responding, she confirmed they can be used by NEV or golf
cart type of vehicles.
Mayor Harnik asked if there will be partnerships when determining where the
charging stations will be located.
Ms. Riddle explained that technically there will be partnerships, because
most likely it will be on private property and require their electricity;therefore,
the City will have to work out the details. Responding to question about the
upgrade of the charging stations at the Civic Center, she said the Reconnect
California Grant provides for the units and installation. Therefore, the old
ones will be replaced with new upgraded units; the City's project will move
forward regardless.
Councilman Tanner asked what recharge level did the City currently have in
its recharge systems.
Mr. Wohlmuth stated the charging stations at the Civic Center were built 15
years ago, and they didn't have levels at that time. Additionally,they are not
compatible with new electric vehicles. He said they have begun to
standardize the chargers for manufactured electric vehicles like the Chevy
Volt and Nissan Leaf, and the new chargerthat ClipperCreek is installing will
be compatible with new electric vehicles.
Councilman Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1)Approve the subject agreement
with ClipperCreek, Inc., Rancho Palos Verdes, California; 2)authorize the Mayorto enter
into said agreement with ClipperCreek, Inc; 3)authorize the installation of electric charging
units at the Parkview Professional Office Building; 4)authorize staff to utilize MSRC Grant
Funds to implement a Community Electric Charging Station Program at commercial
locations within the City. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with
Spiegel ABSENT.
13
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
B. REQUEST FORAWARD OF CONTRACT TO WEST COAST ARBORISTS,
INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,045 FOR THE 2013 CITYWIDE TREE
PRUNING PROGRAM (CONTRACT NO. C32330, PROJECT NO. 932-13)
(JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT HOUSING
AUTHORITY).
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chairman Benson stated the paim trees at Desert
Willow have never been trimmed and wondered if they were included in this
contract or will they remain in their natural state.
Mr. Greenwood stated no palm trees were included in this contract because
it's for broadly trees, and the pruning of palm trees is a separate contract.
However,they are working at Desert Willow to trim some of the trees that are
on the perimeter and subject to vandalism, but the interior palm trees will be
left in their native state. Further responding, he confirmed the trees in the
roundabout will stay intact.
Mr. Wohlmuth recalled for the Council that in December 2012, there were
five fires at Desert Willow, and as those fires were being investigated, staff
looked for ways to mitigate the fire danger. Staff was directed to prune the
skirts on all palm trees near existing buildings and on the exterior of the
Desert Willow wall. He noted the vandals that lit the skirts haven't been
caught. He said there are no plans to prune interior palm trees nor the traffic
circle at Desert Willow Drive. Based on the pattern of vandalism, all of the
fires were lit from the exterior of the wall. He said the fires carried into Holes
5 and 6 of the Fire Cliff Golf Course. He said it was a tough decision, but the
theme of Desert Willow should remain native. However, in order to mitigate
the fire problem, the decision was made to prune the skirts. He reiterated
that no palm trees will be pruned at the roundabout circle.
Councilmember/Member Weber asked staff to elaborate on the statement
made with regard to Reliable Tree Care and the lack of sufficient reference
information submitted.
Landscape Manager Spencer Knight stated contract documents require a
certain level of experience with the type of plant in a city setting, in short,
working in roadways. He said the contractor didn't submit enough
experience, which affects their ability to execute the contract effectively.
Further responding, he said Reliable Tree Care has worked for the City
before, but they typically service palm trees and broad-leaf trees, but they
didn't have a lot of City experience.
Councilmember/Member Weber stated it was unfortunate there was no one
locally that could do the work.
14
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Mr. Knight said there are local contractors that can do the work, but they
chose not to submit a bid the second time around. He noted West Coast
Arborist has worked for the City and they have a presence in the valley;
therefore, they met the criteria for the City's bid documents.
Councilman/Member Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award the subject
contract for 2013 Citywide Tree Pruning Program to West Coast Arborists, Inc., Anaheim,
California, in the total amount of$100,045 (City - $74,250; Housing Authority- $25,795);
2)authorize the Director of Finance to set aside an additional 10% contingency in the total
amount of$10,004.50(City-$7,425; Housing Authority-$2,579.50); 3)appropriate a total
of $28,374.50 ($25,795 contract amount and $2,579.50 contingency) to the respective
Housing Authority Accounts within the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Housing Authority Operating
Budget; 4)authorize the Mayor/Chairman to execute the agreement—funds are available
for the portion of the contract relative to the City and Assessment Districts in Parks and
Recreation Account Nos. 110-4610-453-3320, 110-4611-453-3320, 110-4611-453-3371;
Repair/Maintenance Medians Account No. 110-4614-453-3370, and Assessment District
Fund 200 Accounts; and for the Housing Authority, appropriate a total of$28,374.50 to the
respective Housing AuthorityAccountswithin the Fiscal Year2012-2013 Housing Authority
Operating Budget. Motion was seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote,with Spiegel
ABSENT.
C. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO CONVEY REAL PROPERTY
KNOWN AS APN 627-101-038 AND APN 627-101-039 FROM THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT (PROJECT NO. 656-06)
(JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY).
Mr. Greenwood stated staff had been working on this project for about four
years, and the major component of this project is a free right-turn lane from
Fred Waring Drive to northbound Monterey Avenue. It will include an
ancillary lane along the frontage of College of the Desert on Monterey
Avenue. A minor component of the project is a right-turn lane northbound
San Pablo Avenue to eastbound Fred Waring Drive that requires right-of-way
acquisition from a Successor Agency owned parcel. Staff recommended
approval of the right-of-way dedication. If approved, staff will then go to the
Oversight Board for further approval.
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Benson moved to: 1) Waive further reading and adopt
Successor Agency Resolution No. SA-RDA 015, authorizing and approving the
conveyance of real property known as APN 627-101-038 and APN 627-101-039 to the City
of Palm Desert; 2) Waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 2013 -
04, accepting the conveyance of real property known as APN 627-101-038 and APN
627-101-039 from the Successor Agency to the City; 3) By Minute Motion, authorize the
Mayor/Chair to execute any and all documents necessary for the conveyance. Motion was
seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT.
15
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
D. REQUEST FOR RESCISSION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT NO. C32050
TO CLOUDBURST ENGINEERING, INC., AND AUTHORIZE AWARD OF
SAID CONTRACT TO SOUTH WEST PUMP AND DRILLING IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $109,140.94 FOR THE DESERT WILLOW
IRRIGATION PUMP RENOVATION PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 850-13).
Councilman Tanner stated he would recuse himself from this item due to a
financial conflict of interest and left the Council Chamber.
Mr. Greenwood stated in November the Council awarded a contract to
Cloudburst Engineering, Inc., for pump work at Desert Willow, and in trying
to proceed with the execution of the documents, staff found the contractor
had issues that prevented him from providing bonding as required by the
City. Therefore, staff is asking Council to rescind award of the subject
contract and award to the next lowest bidder, which is South West Pump &
Drilling, Inc.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Rescind award of the
subject contract to Cloudburst Engineering, Inc.; 2) waive the bid irregularities and
authorize award of Contract No. C32050 to South West Pump & Drilling, Inc., Coachella,
California, for the Desert Willow Irrigation Pump Renovation Project in an amount not to
exceed $109,140.94; 3)authorize the Director of Finance to set aside a 10% contingency
for the project in the amount of $10,914.09; 4) authorize the Mayor to execute the
contract; 5) authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute any and all applications,
agreements, and documents required by Southern California Edison to receive potential
Cash Incentives and On-Bill Financing for the irrigation pump upgrades — funds are
available in Course and Grounds Expenses,Account No.441-4195-495-8092. Motion was
seconded by Weber and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel and Tanner ABSENT.
E. REQUEST FORAPPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS AND RELATED ACTIONS
WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - RIVERSIDE COUNTY LIBRARY
SYSTEM / LSSI FOR LIBRARY SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2013.
City Clerk Rachelle Klassen stated that as the liaison to the City's Public
Library on the campus of College of the Desert,they are eagerly awaiting the
Grand Opening next Thursday at 10:00 a.m. As a part of, every year, the
City contributes approximately $350,000 to have additional programs and
services, including additional staff, hours, and materials that are above and
beyond what the County system offers. This is a routine action, as noted
with the 11th Amendment to the Agreement, and the 8th Amendment to the
second Agreement; it was an annual occurrence based on Council's
approved budget forthe Library Fund. Due to staffing changes at the County
level, each person that got this project passed it onto the next, and the next,
and some of those individuals have left, but finally it now had someone who
16
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
created the Agreements the City is required to execute, which covers
services through the end of this fiscal year.
Councilman Tanner moved to, by Minute Motion: 1)Approve Contract No. C141611
- Eleventh Amendment to Agreement to Provide Library Services(Additional Staff)for the
Event and Volunteer Coordinator positions, Part-time Computer Instructor/Lab Technician,
Additional Librarians (1-Reference, 1-Young Adult), and Dedicated Receptionist/Library
Assistant, covering services through June 30, 2013; 2) approve Contract No. C18028 -
Eighth Amendment to Agreement to Provide Library Services (Additional Hours/
Bookmobile) for six additional hours of operation of the Palm Desert Public Library
component of the Multi-Agency Library each Thursday and operation of Bookmobile
Service for Palm Desert, covering services through June 30, 2013; 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$35,000 forthe
purchase of materials for FY 2012-2013—funding for all the above has been approved in
the FY 2012-2013 Budget in Account No. 452-4662-454-4001 - no additional
appropriations are necessary. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote,
with Spiegel ABSENT.
F. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE FAMILY SERVICES OF THE
DESERT 2013"BUNNY HOP"5K RACE AND EL PASEO ROAD CLOSURE
BETWEEN OCOTILLO AND LANTANA.
Ms. Riddle stated Mr. Vic Gainer approached staff to request the approval
of the Bunny Hop Race that would benefit Family Services of the Desert.
Mr. Gainer is the Race Producer who did the event for Martha's Village and
Kitchen, who is basically utilizing the same course and the same event, with
the exception of the beneficiary.
Mayor Harnik stated she was glad to see there were some changes made
based on the experience of the last event, and the last one was great.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson moved to, by Minute Motion: 1)Approve Sunday, March 31,
2013, date for the Family Services of the Desert 5K "Bunny Hop" Race; 2) approve
EI Paseo Road Closure between Ocotillo and Lantana forthe event. Motion was seconded
by Weber and carried by a 4-O vote, with Spiegel ABSENT.
XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS
None
XVI. OLD BUSINESS
None
17
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONSIDERATION OF A REMODEL AND EXPANSION TO THE EXISTING
111 TOWN CENTER TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW GROCERY STORE
AND RETAIL USE - PROJECT LOCATED AT 44-459 TOWN CENTER
WAY, Case No. PP/CUP 12-223(Aubrey Cook McGill Architects,Applicant).
Assistant Planner Kevin Swartz stated the project site is located on the west
side of Town Center Way befinreen Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive.
The site is bordered on its west side by the Palm Valley Storm Channel. In
the past this site has been referred to as the Best Buy Center. The project
consists of demolition of the existing Banner Mattress building and a portion
of the former Best Buy building to accommodate a new Nordstrom Rack and
a new Whole Foods. The Applicant is also modifying a portion of the parking
lot with approximately 60 parking spaces to be redesigned directly in front of
the Whole Foods building for better vehicle circulation. The Applicant is also
relocating existing utilities for Southern California Edison (SCE) and a
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) main water line. Additionally, the
existing median along Highway 1.11 is being modified to provide fora left-turn
pocket into the shopping center for east bound traffic coming from Rancho
Mirage. All turf will be removed for drought tolerant landscaping with the
exception of the portion that the bank owns, which is located on the corner
of Highway 111 and Town Center Way. He displayed renderings for Whole
Foods and Nordstrom Rack, stating Whole Foods will have two outdoor
patios and an indoor patio. The building will have two towers, one facing the
parking lot and one in the rear facing Highway 111. The entire building
maintains an overall height at 27 feet for the main parapet, and it gradually
increases to 42'/2 feet for the architectural features over the main entrances
of the two tower elements. The property is zoned Planned Commercial(PC),
which has a maximum height of 35 feet. The proposed project height is in
accordance with code, Chapter 25, General Provision Section 25.56.300.
The Applicant is proposing two signs on each tower.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson asked if the tower will have signage on both sides.
Mr. Swartz answered yes, stating one sign would be facing Highway 111 and
the other sign would be facing Town Center Way. He noted only one tower
was for Whole Foods, and the other tower was for other tenants. Further
responding, he apologized if the renderings showed three signs, it should
only be finro. He went on to say staff's recommendation for the height was
based on the fact that from Highway 111 to the building pad, there is a 7-to
8-foot differential. He offered to show photographs of a crane that the
Applicant used to demonstrate how tall the tower will be at 45 feet. Those
photographs were used when the project went through the Planning
Commission and are also in Council's packet. He said staff recommended
approval of the project and adoption of the proposed Resolution.
18
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Councilmember Weber stated she liked the project and the signage,
because she likes driving down the street and knowing what the building is.
Councilman Tanner asked whether the left turn into Nordstrom Rack and
Whole Foods from Highway 111 was an out-of-control stop.
Mr. Swartz said it was not. He displayed a photograph of the turn pocket at
Larkspur Lane to show what the one on Highway 111 will look like, stating
the pocket lane will provide 100 feet,which was enough space for four or five
vehicles.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated she was concerned with having signage on
both sides of the two towers. She noted the City didn't allow signs on the
back of the buildings on Interstate 10. She was known for being a great
shopper, and she certainly didn't need a towerto show herwhere Nordstrom
Rack is, stating everyone in town will find it. She is glad both stores are
coming to Palm Desert, but it appears the Applicant is over signing the
project, and if the signage on the front of the store is going to be the same
in the back, it will be too bold and too much.
Mayor Harnik asked if the storm channel ran along the west elevation of the
Center.
Mr. Swartz answered yes. Further responding, he clarified that one tower
was for the Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack, and the other tower, which
is where the former Cost Plus store was located, is for a potential third
tenant.
Councilman Tanner asked if that second towerwill have signage on both the
front and back of the tower.
Mr. Swartz responded he wasn't positive if the second tower will have
signage on the rear, because it wasn't visible from Highway 111. The
Marriott has a lot of mature palm trees and eucalyptus trees that would block
the signage.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated that if that tower wasn't visible, it wouldn't
need signage on the back. However, the tower would be visible from
Highway 111 and Town Center Way.
Councilman Tanner pointed out the project went through the Architectural
Review Commission and the Planning Commission as presented to the
Council this evening. Mr. Swartz concurred.
Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony
FAVORING or OPPOSING this project.
19
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
MR. DAVE MOORE, Senior Vice President, Harsch Investment Properties,
stated this has been a process of quite a few years and it was a culmination
of success to get to this point. He said City staff should be commended for
the positive interaction with the Architectural Review and Planning
Commission, and it was worth noting their advice and experience honed the
project to what it is now. He said they have long-term ownership perspective
where they typically develop or buy projects for the long term. As many are
aware, the Schnitzer family has a long-standing presence here in the Desert
and is also known for building quality projects at quality locations. He said
this project will have positive economic impacts with a considerable amount
of commerce going through, much more so than the previous consideration.
He said the project is unique in that only about ten percent of the frontage
points to Highway 111, which is the store's front door. Therefore, the design
focused around how to get people from Highway 111 to the store, because
it was further encumbered by being in a pool; the building is about seven to
nine feet down off of Highway 111. The Center had tenants that left for
higher visibility spots and is now 75%vacant, so they asked themselves how
do they keep that from happening again, and in answering that question, the
design is what drove the project. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's
comment about signage, he pointed out that Best Buy had signage on both
the front and back of the building. He said they wish to give this building
some prominence with the towers visually, which are at grade level to
Highway 111. They originally had asked to treat the towers like a monument
sign in the air with as many as four or five tenants. However, through the
process and partnership with the City, they came down to having Whole
Foods and Nordstrom Rack on one tower, and have another tower closer to
Fred Waring Drive, to give the Center tower appeal. He said they're two
weeks away from announcing a third tenant, who will be of the same size
and caliber, and they would like to offer that third tenant some tower
presence there as well. If one looked at the totalitarian view of the design
and orientation of this project to Highway 111, one can begin to understand
the design. He said they intend to build a first-class shopping center of
excellent quality.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated she was not concerned about the towers,
although, she didn't like them to begin with, but has accepted them for the
reasons stated that they sit lower to Highway 111. She is objecting to
signage on the back of the building, because the City has not allowed
signage on the back of the buildings on Interstate 10. She didn't believe it
was necessary, because she didn't believe people will have any trouble
finding Whole Foods and Nordstrom Rack. Especially, because they are a
welcome addition knowing what they will bring to a community.
MR. MOORE responded he appreciated the perspective and would welcome
some discussion. However, their strategy or philosophy was to make the
back of the building inviting, because it was visible from Highway 111; it will
20
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
be seen through trees and vegetation. The goal was to treat the back of the
building as an amenity to the Center, however some of the features may not
translate well on the renderings, but the lattice work, columns, and
architectural designs is so it didn't look like the back. With that in mind, using
the signage helps create that sense of presence where people can say that's
where the store is versus thaYs where they throw the trash or take delivery.
He believed their philosophy had gained some support, but he was sensitive
to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's issue.
Mayor Harnik asked about the signage lighting on the back of the building.
MR. MOORE said the lighting is channel illuminated letters with individual
letters directly applied to the wall. Further responding, he said Best Buy was
one big box with a price tag, which was a smaller version of the one they had
in the front.
Councilman Tanner asked when the Applicant anticipated starting and
finishing the project if approved this evening.
MR. MOORE stated they are in the process of applying for demolition
permits, and the Building Department is awaiting the outcome of this
evening's action. He hoped to start the process mid February and working
through the fall for a third-quarter turnover. He said they build the shelves,
ambience, exterior, and architectural upgrades, then the tenant makes their
specific improvements. He said they are planning for a 2014 spring grand
opening.
MR. JORDAN SCHNITZER, President, Harsch Investment Properties,
reiterated Mr. Moore's comments about the wonderFul give and take process
with staff, stating they work in six States, and the Council should be proud
of its staff. Secondly, they've had homes in Palm Desert for 60 years now,
so they don't just build and develop things to sell them. With respect to the
architecture of the building, he said Architect Tom Aubrey from San Diego,
who does stunning work was brought into the project. He noted the last 10
to 15 percent of the design is the toughest, because they put as much time
in as they did for the first 85%. He said the design includes a lot of natural
woods, natural materials, and natural stone that is quite different from what's
been done in the Valley, which he believed will set an aesthetic standard as
a jewel for Palm Desert. He said the goal is to get it right aesthetically in
terms of the size of the letters, trellises, etc. As a point of human interest,
Brian Williams, who is head of construction, is the grandson of renowned
Palm Springs Architect Stewart Williams, and son to Sydney (sp?) who
works at the Museum and is in charge of Modernism. He went on to say they
are excited about the center, they have other tenants beyond the ones
Mr. Moore mentioned are coming, which will reinforce the site and local
tenants who have stood with them. He noted they plan to meet with the local
21
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
tenants tomorrow, assuming they get approval from the City Council, to
discuss the timing and so forth.
Mayor Harnik stated she was sensitive to Mayor Pro Tem Benson's concern
about the signage on the back of the building, and asked if there would be
more than three signs with the potential for more tenants.
MR. SCHNITZER answered no. He said the goal for Architect Tom Aubrey
was to not have the back of the building look like a loading zone; the intent
was to honor the property. The columns on the back are of the same stone
work that the front of the property will have. He said a lot of money is being
spent aestheticatly on the color and trellis, because in its totality it needs to
be aesthetically pleasing. He believed this building will be much more
aesthetically pleasing and respectful of the site than the Best Buy sign with
its blue and yellow letters, which was quite garish. However, he understood
it was their standard design that the City approved 20 years ago.
Responding to question about the loading dock, he confirmed the loading
dock is on the back side of the building. However, the stone columns are
above the loading docks, almost floating above the base of the loading dock.
He noted that through the process they addressed concems about deliveries,
and theywill be done early in the morning. He said Whole Foods is sensitive
about the communities they are in, and although, the Planning Commission
didn't place a requirement, they asked that it be it be emphasized to Whole
Foods to be sensitive to the neighbors. However, there aren't any
apartments close to the site.
MR. JOE GAUGUSH, Broken Arrow Trail, Palm Desert, stated he had a
technical question regarding the left-turn pocket as it's being proposed,
which he briefly spoke with Director of Public Works Mark Greenwood. He
said because of the geometric of the location, its proximity to the existing
bridge, the curvature of the roadway, and the fact that Whole Foods is very
successful, he believed that left-turn position needed a critical look.
Mr. Greenwood agreed to review and work with the Applicant to make sure
it is safe.
Mayor Harnik stated she would appreciate it, because during the holidays
she was aware of the vehicle back up at Desert Crossings and agreed it was
a matter to be mindful of for safety reasons.
Mr. Greenwood noted that eleven months out of the year there will be no
problem, but during the holiday season staff may have to take a look.
With no further public testimony offered, Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing
closed.
22
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Councilman Tanner stated the signage on Highway 111 was probably not
going to be the primary signage, but it will increase the volume of activity at
that Center. He said if he was a tenant there, he would probably tell people
to look for the Nordstrom or Whole Foods sign, and he may be on the north
side of the Center. Therefore, he wasn't concern over the signage. He
commented that after serving seven years on the Planning Commission, he
felt the signage was right on.
Mayor Harnik commended the Architectural Review and Planning
Commission for all their work to bring the project this far, because it turned
into a wonderFul project and knew the community was looking forward to it.
Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt: 1) Resolution
No. 2013-05, approving Precise Plan/Conditional Use Permit 12-223, including two tower
elements and a portion of the building facades at 42'/2 feet in height, subject to conditions;
2) Notice of Exemption Form "B." Motion was seconded by Weber.
Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated that although it was against her better
judgement, she will vote in favor because both stores are vital to Palm
Desert. The City has wanted both stores for a long time, and she hoped the
back of the building lived up to the expectations of the Applicant.
Mayor Harnik stated she appreciated Mayor Pro Tem Benson's comments
and concerns, because she felt the same.
Mayor Harnik called for the vote, and the motion carried on a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel
ABSENT.
B. CONSIDERATION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ESTABLISHING
UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CANYONS AT
BIGHORN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTIONS 25.25.190 AND 25.24.330, Case No. DP 12-371
(Bighorn Development, LLC, Applicant).
Principal Planner Tony Bagato stated the proposed Development Plan
12-371 is an amendment to an existing approved project that went back to
1991. The map that staff will be referring to was amended as a vesting map
in 1997.This project is known as the Canyons of Bighorn,which incorporates
two areas,the Planned Residential Zone and Hillside Residential Zone. The
portion crosshatched is the portion staff will be referring to this evening. The
other portion of the map is zoned Hillside Planned Residential, which has
standards that apply to hillside homes, because they are visible to the public.
The Canyons tends to be mostly below Highway 74, and not visible to the
public. The berm with rod iron fencing with a lot of natural landscaping was
constructed during the project's initial phase. It is zoned Residential, Low
Density, zero to four units per acre in the General Plan. The last vesting
23
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
map was approved in 1997, known as Vesting Tentative Tract Map 25296.
He said the hillsides are not part of the project. He displayed a map exhibit
for his presentation that is also included in the staff report. However, when
the initial project came through in 1991, it didn't have this map exhibit. The
Planning Commission approved the project with standards of 5-foot setbacks
on each side, 15-foot setbacks in the front, and 10 or 15 feet in the rear,
which was adopted in 1991. The project went before the City Council in
October 1991, and due to concerns over the Environmental Impact Report
(EIR)from the Bighorn Institute related to impacts to the Bighorn Sheep, the
project was modified and returned. When the Plan was returned, the
setback conditions were changed and was referred to the map exhibit. From
staff's research,there was no specific planning reason whytheychanged the
setbacks. The modifications were mainly to address Bighorn Institute's
concern; therefore the project was downsized with a lot more open space
and a buffer zone was created to lessen the impact toward the south side of
the project. He said conditions were placed on the map, which stated all
setbacks should be applied as stated in the map. What is interesting about
the map, is that each one of the lot types is rectangular and/or square,which
are based on lot size. He said the lot type is identified by a table that's in the
map. One of the problems today is that many of the lots are irregular shape
and they all have curved frontages; there isn't a straight street in the
Canyons of Bighorn. When staff looks at a current map of Bighorn, all the
streets are curvature, it has many cull-de-sacs and no rectangular lots. He
. said some lots are close to looking rectangular, but then there are some that
almost look like a circle. Therefore, one can't determine where the setbacks
are supposed to be applied, which is one of the issues. The other issue is
that the maps were phased, and when that happens, lot numbers get
changed. In the original map there is Lot 1 through Lot 372, but when a map
is phased, it is re-created and the lot numbers change. Additionally, the
sizes get changed through construction or through partial map waivers that
combine maps or move property lines within Bighorn. The goal of Bighorn
is to work around the natural environment and try to maximize the views into
the golf course and open terrain, and not necessarily their neighboring lots.
Due to changes from phasing and merging of lots,the lot line configurations
have changed. He said this Development Plan was proposed by Bighorn to
help clarify some of the issues faced by staff and to create uniform standards
that can be applied to all lots, but also providing Bighorn the flexibility to
maximize their design guidelines. He said front setbacks will be 15 feet, 10
feet for the rear, and 5 feet for the sides, which is similar to the conditions in
1991. There is a separation distance between buildings of 10 feet. Even
though there are five-foot setbacks to the side property line, there is still a
10-foot distance between neighboring buildings. The maximum height is 20
feet, which is what the previous condition was within Bighorn. The Iot
coverage is stated at 60%, however, the previous approval didn't state a
specific percentage, so there is some discussion on whether or not it falls
under the Zoning Ordinance or if staff's recommendation is based upon
24
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Bighorn's Architectural Review Guidelines. He said the modification section
was added for Director approval. He said it was staff's position that it was
memorializing the standard of practice over the past 12 years he's been with
the City and 15 years of Bighorn's development. Another reason staff
supports the Development Plan is because Bighorn's Architectural and
Landscape Guidelines were approved by the City with the CC&R's as part
of the map. He said these guidelines set up each property to have a
developable envelope for each lot as shown in Figure 2 of the Staff Report.
He said Bighorn guidelines create a circular area that identifies different
development standards; it has a Building Envelope Boundary, which is
mainly for driveway and utility improvements; a Transition Area that goes
between the views into the areas they try to mitigate; and then there is the
Natural Transition to the golf course and open space, which has to be
protected. Finally, there is the pad for the home area. He said Bighorn is
trying to maximize views into the open space area and not the interior
neighbors. In reviewing the analysis under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), staff determined it was a Class 5 Exemption, because
it was only modifying development standards for construction of homes, it
didn't change the density of the project or the land use pattern, and it didn't
physically change what one saw outside of Bighorn. He said there are no
environmental impacts as these are pads that have already been graded.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Development Plan
on December 18, 2012. The Planning Commission and City Council staff
have sent out more than 500 legal notices, and only one letter was received
for the Planning Commission, which is highlighted in the staff report. A
second letter was received by the same party, which was different from the
one received earlier. The following are the points raised in the letter and
staff's response: 1) The Plan is not consistent with the General Plan as
required by State law for specific plans. In reviewing this point, staff's
position is that Bighorn is not a specific plan, because it's already a planned
community development, and this was a Development Plan amending their
setbacks. Additionally, staff didn't believe the Plan fell under State law, and
secondly, the proposed Development Plan is consistent with the General
Plan. Staff further cited from the Community Design Element Goals 2 and
3, and Policies 4 and 6, which are noted in the staff. As far as the Bighorn
Architectural and Landscape Design Guidelines,they are required underthe
CC&Rs to be approved by the City, and both were approved by the City in
1997; 2) The Plan does not comply with CEQA. Staff would argue that the
Development Plan is a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for"minor a/terations
to /and without impacting the overall project," which staff believed was
consistent with that exception; 3) The standards in Tentative Tract Map
25296 are clear and simple. Staff agrees the standards are laid out clear
and simple, but when trying to apply them practically to lots that are not
rectangular, it's not as easy. The standard practice was to let Bighorn
approve them, but now that staff is having to look at them in more detail, it's
not always clear which lot it's supposed to be, and how one can determine
25
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
- where the front and back is on corner lots; 4) The Development Plan
interferes with the CC&Rs. He said the HOA requires the approval of the
plans, and ultimately the City wouldn't get involved in civil issues. However,
staff reinforces that it relies on the guidelines and Bighorn's approval, which
is consistent with the CC&Rs approved by the City. He said Bighorn goes
through a process of identifying the natural area, the transitional area, the
private area, etc., stating Bighorn is looking out for the best interest in their
community; 5) Bighorn has no right to seek approval, and it will negatively
impact the majority of the homeowners. When this request was initially
brought in, staff looked at it just like a re-zone to any other part of the City,
noting that anyone can request to modify standards. He said it was currently
being done at Palm Desert Country Club. Staff `s process is to determine
what's in the best interest of the community and then makes a
recommendation. The map shows that Bighorn does have a vested interest
with 26 vacant lots with a portion of them owned by Bighorn;the letter claims
Bighorn owns 10%; 6) The objector claims the lots are rectangular and on
flat land. The map exhibit shows that some of the lots are close to being
rectangular, but they have a curved frontage, and they are not on flat land.
The pad heights vary six feet from each other; some lots are 701, 706, or
712 feet from another. In some areas they drop significantly, which creates
challenges when you have astringent setbacks. Therefore, flexibility
provides better for the review and analysis. 7) Bighorn is seeking approval
for litigation reasons. Staff is not really addressing this point, but believes
the Development Plan is a benefit to the public and City, because it provides
more flexibility and a standard that applies uniformly for all lots that are
irregular shape. He said there are terrain issues out there, and the City has
relied on the HOA approval for the past 15 years without any setback
violations that he is aware of, and this will actually approve them, but they
weren't done intentionally. Another issue that was brought up in the
Planning Commission, but was not mentioned in their current letter, is that
there is a conflict with BBK(Best Best&Krieger, LLP),which is not the case.
In conclusion, he stated the Planning Commission and staff is
recommending approval. There are findings in the staff report to address the
approval.
Councilman Tanner asked how many lots were available in Bighorn.
Mr. Bagato responded there were 26 vacant lots remaining.The original map
approved 372 lots, but because of lot mergers, etc., he didn't knowthe exact
number. Further responding, he confirmed that based on his 12 years with
the City, he was not aware of any complaints for setback issues in Bighorn.
Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing �en and invited public testimony
FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter.
26
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
MR. ANDREW FOGG, Cox, Castie & Nicholson, LLP, stated he was
representing the Applicant, Bighorn Development. He thanked staff for the
work and presentation as they agreed with everything that was said. In
response to the number of lots within the development plan area, there are
184 lots total with 26 lots(14% percent) undeveloped. In reviewing this, and
it is important to make the distinction, this Plan does not affect the hillside
lots. The subject lots are sunken down into the development and not visible
from Highway 111; they are internal and didn't affect the rest of the world,
and really just an internal Bighorn issue. He said this Plan will formalize the
process that the homeowners' association (HOA) and the City has used
historically. He said Bighorn has created a remarkabfe site that has been
recognized by numerous architectural awards,and has also been recognized
by the City. The general consensus is that it's well-planned, well-
implemented, and a well-designed community, and the HOA takes that
seriously. He said Bighorn has no interest in creating urban dense
environments, because they are viewed toward maintaining an open space
and keeping a consistent feel, emphasizing the views looking toward the golf
course, which is the heart of Bighorn and the center to what everyone is
oriented toward. He said this Development Plan will create a design
envelope with established minimum setbacks. It will not be a zero lot
subdivision with houses abutting right against each other, because it has
those transition zones. It was important to understand that the Plan will allow
flexibility to those who are closest to the development, which is the HOA's
Architectural Landscape Control Committee. He said they understand how
the terrain bears, how the corridors are created, and understand how the
structures orient themselves toward the golf course and views internally
within Bighorn.This Development Plan creates an envelope to put the house
in the right place and maintain that feel and views. There may be instances
where the setback may be 8 feet instead of 10 feet. The one resident who
complained, his house is setback from the side yard from the property line
somewhere between 8 and 9 feet. The house next door to him, which has
actually sued, would also be setback 8 to 9 feet, because it's consistent and
it works; it's a new structure in the exact same relationship to an existing
structure. Also, the proposed Development Plan did not interFere with the
CC&Rs in any manner, Bighorn will continue to adhere and implement them
in the same way they've done; there will be no change in that process. He
said zoning is an exercise of the City's police power; the CC&Rs can't trump
the City's power. There are only very limited circumstances, in which, the
City's zoning power can be delegated away, and the CC&Rs is not an
example of that. Here, there is no impediment to making this Development
Plan approved in formalizing these processes and create these minimum
standards. He pointed out that not anyone can go out there and build to 5
or 10 feet by right, because the HOA will look at it and apply their expert
opinion in making sure that things are developed properly. He said the Plan
will benefit all, including the residents. Because of the recent issues raised,
one can argue there is some uncertainty, but this Plan will provide clarity and
27
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
certainty. The structures out at Bighorn are approved and viewed as
consistent. There will be no argument that any property value has been
diminished or anything of that nature. In fact, they are enhanced and
approved, and of course, that translates directly to the City's tax base,
including property values to help the City's bottom line. Finally, he
emphasized the HOA took an official position recently on this matter. They
held a noticed vote in front of the entire community where no one spoke in
opposition, and there was unanimous approval. A letter was submitted to
the City memorializing that vote by stating the HOA is in full support of the
Plan and urges the Council's support. He offered to answer any questions.
MR. GREGORY M. HATTON, 20281 Birch Street, Suite 100, Newport
Beach, CA, attorney representing Lawrence Pasternack, stated he's been
before the City so many times on this issue with photographs and diagrams;
therefore, he wouldn't spend a lot of time repeating the same information.
He noted he provided an update to the book that was previously given to the
Council that addresses the Planning Commission hearing,which includesthe
same statements made by Principal Planner Bagato this evening. He has
a response to those statements in writing; therefore, he believed the record
was adequate. What he didn't hear this evening and still hasn't heard
anywhere is the idea that there is some benefit to making these provision
retroactive in time. He said retroactivity creates a numberof legal issues and
legal problems for the City that the taxpayers really need not bear the
burden. He said Bighorn wants to make this retroactively, because Bighorn
has been sued for not complying with its CC&Rs and the City's setbacks
incorporated into them. The City Planning Department has a similar interest,
because despite repeated requests that it comply with the setbacks set at
Bighorn,they did not do so. Therefore, Superior Court entered a Preliminary
Injunction stopping construction and setbacks on one of the lots at Bighorn.
He noted that his firm is involved in litigation in relation to this issue, and
when Judge Evans heard about this new proposal and that it was based on
the claim that it was difficult somehow for Bighorn to figure out its setbacks,
his response was "They are just figuring that out now?" He said the Council
has to take a serious look at whether it is being told accurate facts about the
problem at Bighorn. He said in 2002 Bighorn had no problem hiring
landscape architectural consultants to draw the City's setbacks into all these
"oddly" configured lots; therefore, Bighorn, the consultants, and the HOA
knew what the setbacks are, because they are in black and white. He
wonders if the HOA ever sent those setback diagrams down to the City's
Planning Department to inform them that Bighorn knew what the City's
setbacks are, because Bighorn asked for them 15 years ago. He keeps
hearing about this original plan in 1991 that had 5-foot setbacks and smaller
front and rear setbacks. So if one looked at that 1991 site plan that was
being presented to the City, one will see a development that is much more
akin to a Del Webb and Sun City type of development where the lots are
rolled out side by side on the golf course. What happened between 1991
28
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
and 1996 is the true goal of the Bighorn change; they changed that
development from tract style lots into custom estate lots - 30,000 to 35,000
square feet, an excess of a half an acre. Bighorn also kept some villa lots
down the hill in the north side of the development. Therefore, because of the
different sizes of lots, Bighom came up with a concept/plan that makes the
setbacks bigger as the lots get bigger, and it has been easy for them to do
that. Now after 15 years of that type of handling, one citizen has complained
about it to Bighorn, the City Council, and the City's Planning Department to
beg and plead for enforcement of the setbacks, but they didn't; therefore a
judge started a Preliminary Injunction. And now, all of a sudden, Bighorn
thinks it's time for a new Development Plan because there are 26 lots
undeveloped and it will benefit the public. He said that's not what's really
going on, what Bighorn wants is for the Development Plan to be retroactive,
because they want to create a new law, under which, the City's Planning
Department and Bighorn can be compliant with the very laws they have
broken, which is what the Council is being asked to do this evening. He said
the Council is being asked to enact a new law to exonerate the very people
who broke the old ones, which is not the proper use of government. He
begged the Council to take a careful look at the new materials provided,
because there are clear and honest responses to the inaccurate statements
and representations that have been made here and before the Planning
Commission by both Bighorn and Planning Department. In conclusion, he
said if the Council wants to get a good look at what the new setbacks would
look like in practice, he asked them to look at before and after photos under
Tab K, which demonstrates 5-foot setbacks. The setbacks that are being
built on the lot next to Mr. Pasternack,the complaining party,were approved
by Bighorn and the Planning Department, which basically advocates its
authority to Bighorn to approve whatever it wants. Those setbacks are 6'/2
feet at the nearest point to Mr. Pasternack's property. The before pictures
with the lush side yards that are suppose to exist between the estate house
at Bighorn, and in the after photographs, the lush sides are wiped out, and
that is just the structure. Bighorn wants there to be zero lot lines for
swimming pools, so that one neighbor's swimming pool can connectwith the
other swimming pool legally. He said the proposed Development Plan is
ludicrous, stating it was designed to create a defense in litigation forthe City
and Bighorn.
MR. MARTIN MUELLER, Palm Springs, stated he has a lawoffice in Rancho
Mirage, and represents Dr. Bruce and Trudy Fagel who live next door to the
objector, Mr. Pasternack, who is suing his client. His client is building a
home at 1020 Cahuilla Falls,who also has another residence at Bighorn, but
they are building a newer home at the Canyons. The Canyons' residence as
proposed and planned is 8 feet from the property, not 6'/2. He said
Mr. Pasternack's house is less than 10 feet from the property line. He noted
he has lived and practiced here in the Valley all his career, and he is a golf
nut that loves Bighorn's Country Club, because he's seen it developed to
29
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
literally the premiere residential golf course property in the Valley and
anywhere in the Country. Bighorn has developed to the credit of the City and
Bighorn developers, because of the flexibility in what was designed and
approved, including the strong reliance staff has placed on the HOA and its
Architectural Review Committee to approve developments with a vision
toward this Bighorn aesthetic. He said what Mr. Pasternack and his Counsel
have said to the Court in Indio, is that Bighorn is a cesspool of zoning
violations. He said he's driven through the gates of Bighorn, been in
residences, and played golf there, and it is not a cesspool. A person that
sees Bighorn as a cesspool, not surprisingly, will threaten to sue the City,
neighbor, and the developers of Bighorn. However, it's been 20 years of
development at Bighorn, and there is only one unhappy neighbor and one
unhappy member. He said when plans and development standards are
changed, one may invariably see many neighbors coming out of the
woodwork to object, but it's not the case here. The reality is that Bighorn is
a great project, because it's been developed the way that it has over the
years. He said it was a reinstatement of the flexible standards, which is
consistent with how clubs develop over time. He said the folks at Bighorn
appreciate it, have approved it, as well as his client. He urged the Council
to approve the Development Plan as proposed this evening.
With no further public testimony offered, Mayor Harnik declared the public hearing
closed.
Councilman Tanner stated the question has been asked about how many
complaints there have been,and Mr. Mueller and Mr. Bagato have answered
that question. Therefore, the intent here is for the Council to do what is right
for the majority. If there is a question, it has been answered by both staff
and the City's legal department.
Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution
No. 2013 - 06, approving Development Plan 12-371 as proposed. Motion was seconded
by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT.
XVIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS
A. CITY MANAGER
1. City Manager Meeting Summaries for the Period January 1 - 11,
2013.
With City Council concurrence, the Meeting Summaries were received and filed.
2. Department of Finance (DOF) Update
30
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
Mr. Wohlmuth recalled for City Council that he previously reported
that the Palm Desert Oversight Board approved the Settlement
Agreement with County of Riverside relative to the Regional Access
Project (RAP). The Oversight Board Resolution of approval went to
the State Department of Finance (DOF), and yesterday he received
word that it had objected to the action. Therefore, he's notified RAP
Executive DirectorJudee Cox,Supervisor Benoit and his staffthatthis
has occurred, and he wifl work with the DOF and Palm Desert's legal
counsel to attempt to sort out the matter and get it approved.
Simultaneously, he hoped to soon get the UCR existing obligation
approved for the 11.5-acre property transfer for development of an
ambulatory medical center. As these Redevelopment issues are
worked through, he assured Council that he would provide updates
on the progress being made. Upon inquiry, he said staff will
aggressively work toward resolution with DOF; however, he was �
unsure of DOF's timeline in this regard.
B. CITY ATTORNEY
None �
C. CITY CLERK
1. Reminder of City Council Study Session on Monday, January 28,
2013, at 9:00 a.m. in the North Wing Conference Room for the
Purpose of Conducting Committee/Commission Applicant Interviews.
Ms. Klassen reminded City Councilmembers of Monday's Study
Session to interview Committee/Commission applicants. She said 33
applicants were recommended for interview, with 22 of them
responding and able to be scheduled. The Study Session will begin
at 9:00 a.m. with the last appointment set for 3:15 p.m.
Councilmembers noted the schedule.
2. Announcement of City Council Study Session on Thursday,
February 14, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. in the Administrative Conference
Room to Discuss Palm Desert Country Club.
Ms. Klassen noted the Study Session scheduled prior to the next
regular City Council Meeting on February 14.
Councilmembers made note of this scheduled Study Session.
31
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
D. PUBLIC SAFETY
1. Fire Department
None
2. Police Department
None
E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
1. City Council Requests for Action:
None
2. City Council Consideration of Travel Requests and Reports:
None
3. City Council Committee Reports:
None
4. City Council Comments:
a) Mayors and New Councilmembers AcademX- Councilmember
Weber said that while she couldn't speak on Councilman
Tanner's behalf, she had a wonderful trip to Sacramento to the
League of California Cities' Conference last week and got a lot
of good education there.
Mayor Harnik agreed that the trip the three Councilmembers
made to Sacramento for the League Academy was very
worthwhile, and a lot of good education was received. She
also commended the League for all its good work toward the
mission of keeping local control at the city level and
appreciated all it did for Palm Desert.
b) Thank You — Councilman Tanner thanked staff for all its hard
work in preparing for today's agenda.
32
PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT
REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 24, 2013
c) Ixtapa-Zihuataneio Sister City Dele�aq tion—Mayor Harnik said
this week Councilmembers also welcomed the Ixtapa-
Zihuatanejo representatives, with a really nice event held
yesterday.
d) "Cruise Night EI Paseo" — Mayor Harnik commented that she
hadn't yet returned from Sacramento for the first event held
last Friday evening but understood it was a tremendous
success. The next"Cruise Night" is scheduled for February 1,
and she hoped everyone would come out and enjoy it.
5. Suqaested Items for Future City Council Meeting Agendas:
None
XIX. ADJOURNMENT
Upon a motion by Tanner, second by Weber, and 4-0 vote of the City Council, with
Spiegel ABSENT, Mayor Harnik adjourned the meeting at 6:14 p.m.
JAN HARNIK, MAYOR
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
33