2003 04 01 CC Minutes LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL
~ ...... MINUTES
ii APRIL 1, 2003
A regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at the hour of
2:00 p.m. by Mayor Adolph.
PRESENT: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph
ABSENT' None
PUBLIC COMMENT- None
CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with labor negotiators, Ski Harrison, Mark Weiss, and John Ruiz,
regarding negotiations with the La Quinta City Employees Association pursuant
to Government Code Section 54957.6 - Meet and Confer Process.
,._. Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency and to Closed Session to and until the
hour of 3:00 p.m.
3:00 P.M.
The City Council meeting reconvened with no decisions being made in Closed Session
which require reporting pursuant to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code (Brown
Act).
Council Member Osborne led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
Council Member Sniff requested Consent Item No. 10 be moved to Business Item
No. 1.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
City Council Minutes 2 April 1, 2003
PRESENTATIONS - None
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE - None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION -It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to approve the City
Council Minutes of March 18, 2003, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED APRIL 1, 2003.
2. APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES
AGENCY TO UTILIZE THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR A FREE LA QUINTA
IMMUNIZATION CLINIC ON JULY 9 AND AUGUST 13, 2003, FROM 10:00
A.M. TO 12:00 P.M. AND TUBERCULOSIS RECHECKS IN THE STUDY
SESSION ROOM ON JULY 11 AND AUGUST 15, 2003, FROM 10:00 A.M. TO
10:30 A.M.
3. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A
FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT NO.
29323-1, ESPLANADE, LA QUINTA DUNES 350, INC.
4. APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FOR TRACT NO. 30834, STONE CREEK RANCH, MADISON ESTATES, LLC.
5. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A STREET CLOSURE PERMIT FOR
THE ANNUAL DON BERRY MEMORIAL GREATER COACHELLA VALLEY
SOAPBOX DERBY TO BE HELD APRIL 26, 2003, ON AVENIDA BERMUDAS.
6. APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT DEED FROM 111 VENTURE, LLC,
FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 111 AND
EAST OF ADAMS STREET FOR THE PURPOSES OF ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS - THE EXTENSION OF LA QUINTA DRIVE.
7. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A DONATION OF CATERING
SERVICES FOR SENIOR CENTER SPECIAL EVENTS.
City Council Minutes 3 April 1, 2003
8. APPROVAL OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE RETIRED
AND SENIOR VOLUNTEER PROGRAM.
9. AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE RECREATION
SUPERVISOR TO ATTEND THE CALIFORNIA JPIA PLAYGROUND SAFETY
INSPECTOR CERTIFICATION COURSE AND NATIONAL EXAM, MAY 21-23,
2003, IN LA PALMA, CALIFORNIA.
10. SEE BUSINESS SESSION ITEM NO. 1.
11. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL GOALS.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to approve the
Consent Calendar as recommended and amended with the exception of Item
No. 10 and with Item Nos. 3, 5, and 7 being approved by RESOLUTION NOS.
2003-17 through 2003-19 respectively. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE
ORDER NO. 2003-31.
In commenting on Consent Item No. 11, Council Member Henderson referenced
a statement on Page 7 of the transcript (Attachment No. 1) regarding the
possible need to "bite the bullet" to provide better public safety services. She
noted next year's financial support for the Chamber of Commerce and the Arts
Foundation may be part of the bullet the City has to bite.
BUSINESS SESSION
1. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF: 1 ) LOAN FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROJECT AREA NO. 1; AND 2)
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH
AND SAFETY SECTION 33445.
(This item was moved from Consent Calendar Item No. 10.)
Council Member Sniff stated he is concerned about depleting the General Fund
for projects, and asked if the reference to "Eisenhower Bridge Improvements"
on Page 1 of the staff report was an error.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Finance Director Falconer confirmed the
project description in the staff report and resolution should read "Eisenhower
--- Median Improvements", not Eisenhower Bridge Improvements. He reviewed a
~ memo to Council regarding how the $6 million loan would impact the General
Fund, and explained the loan will allow the City to move forward with the library
City Council Minutes 4 April 1, 2003
construction, Avenida La Fonda Improvements, and design of the future
Eisenhower Bridge Improvements.
Council Member Henderson asked what would happen to the $6 million if not
loaned to the Redevelopment Agency.
Mr. Falconer responded the pooled interest rate in February was 1.99%.
Council Member Perkins requested a chronological list of the General Fund
Reserve amounts over the last ten years.
Council Member Sniff questioned the language, "from time to time," in the
Promissory Note, and stated he feels it should be more defined. He also
questioned how 7% interest can be paid when investments are only paying
1.99%
Mr. Falconer explained the City's current investments are, generally, limited to
two years at 2% and five-year treasuries are under 5% He noted there are
some risks with the loan, and the City is being compensated for that risk.
City Manager Genovese stated the terminology, "from time to time," was used
to provide the maximum flexibility for repayment. He noted it would allow the
loan to be repaid earlier because there is no fixed time for repayment.
Council Member Sniff stated he still doesn't understand where the 7% interest
rate comes from.
Mr. Falconer stated the 7% interest rate was set because of the risk involved
in the investment. He advised a 30-year treasury bill, which is the safest
investment, is at 5% interest, and this loan is not at the same level of risk so
2% was assigned for the higher risk.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Falconer stated he expects interest rates to
rise but not to these levels.
City Attorney Jenson noted the Agency could utilize its tax increment dollars to
repay the loan, and is not limited to using the interest it receives from
investments.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Genovese stated only a portion of the
tax increments are allocated to other payments.
City Council Minutes 5 April 1, 2003
_
Ms. Jenson stated this debt will be subordinated to existing bonds, as well as
future bond indebtedness, so the loan does not interfere with the ability to
procure future bond revenues.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Falconer confirmed $4.3 million
of the loan for library construction is intended to be repaid with Developer
Impact Fees (DIF). He explained the DIF fees are collected and placed in a
special revenue fund as development occurs, and the amount collected for the
library fund will be transferred to the Redevelopment Agency to repay the loan.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Falconer advised the Landscape &
Lighting Assessment District annual shortfall is $800,000 and growing and is
paid from the General Fund. He stated staff is trying to address the shortfall
through economic development, and as discussed under Council Goals, possibly
a tax. He stated there will be a balance of $4.5 million in undesignated funds
in the General Fund if the $6 million loan is approved.
Council Member Sniff asked if the $4.5 million would cover the current and
growing shortfall for at least four years.
Mr. Genovese stated, as a policy issue over the last 15 years, staff has never
suggested using any of the reserve funds to cover the operating budget. He
added there could be a point in time when the Council would reach into the
reserves to cover an operating deficient.
Council Member Sniff commented on the importance of not getting into the
reserves like other cities have done.
Council Member Henderson stated she understood the Council had discussed
funding the library in this matter for several months, and that the only other
option was to wait 30 years to generate sufficient DIF funds. She noted this
method allows the City to invest in itself with it's own reserves.
Mayor Adolph noted the City gives the County almost $1 million each year for
library services, and when the City has its own library, that amount will stay in
the City.
Mr. Falconer stated that would be subject to future negotiations.
Mayor Adolph thanked staff for the analysis in the memo, and commented on
.---- the importance of not utilizing the emergency reserves unless a catastrophe
occurs.
City Council Minutes 6 April 1, 2003
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A LOAN FROM THE CITY OF LA QUINTA TO THE
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33445(a).
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to adopt Resolution
2003-20, as amended (changing "Eisenhower Bridge ImproVements'' to
"Eisenhower Median Improvements"). Motion carried unanimously.
STUDY SESSION
1. DISCUSSION OF CITY OF LA QUINTA MARKETING STRATEGIES FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2003/2004.
Assistant City Manager Weiss presented the staff report, and Marketing
Consultant Andrea Carter, of Kiner Goodsell, Inc., reviewed the proposed
marketing plan.
Council Member Perkins asked what type of marketing is being done to reach
cities within 300 miles.
Ms. Carter stated the infomercial airs in San Diego and the Riverside area. The
City has marketed to Orange County and Los Angeles area in the past and can
do it again. She understood the Seattle area is the only city where the
infomercial is being used within flying distance.
Council Member Perkins stated he feels the marketing used with potential
developers within the 300-mile range should be a "hand-in-glove" type
operation.
Ms. Carter agreed, and stated they should probably consider advertising next
year in the Inland Empire publication, Inland Empire Business Journal, and other
publications. She stated staff keeps a record of calls received as a result of the
magazine advertising.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Weiss confirmed the potential
marketing budget of $300,000 is for other items as well as the Kiner Goodsell
contract and it includes a carryover for the banner program. He estimated the
Kiner Goodsell contract at $200,000.
City Council Minutes 7 April 1, 2003
, ,,,
Council Member Henderson commented on the success of the video and the
importance of keeping it updated. She stated she would be interested in
knowing how much of the consultant cost is for creating the City Calendar, and
doesn't feel it's necessary to be in their contract every year. She suggested
improving the readability of the newsletter by increasing the font size and using
black letters. She wasn't sure it is necessary for the banner program to go
through the marketing consultant, and stated she would be looking at that cost.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Community Services Director
Horvitz stated staff is working with Kiner Goodsell on a postcard advertising the
City picnic and Concert Under the Stars event.
Council Member Henderson' stated she will be supporting another marketing
program this year but is not sure how much more marketing the City needs, and
noted the residents are questioning the need.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Ms. Carter stated new infomercials
have been created each year but this year they will be recommending updating
the current video.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Ms. Horvitz explained this banner
program is not the Village bainner program. It is an economic development tool
wherein four different banners would be rotated on poles along Washington
Street and Highway 111 to advertise events in the City between the months of
November and March.
Council Member Henderson istated she didn't realize this was for a different
banner program, and isn't sure the City is ready to move forward with it.
Mr. Genovese noted the Council has previously discussed having banners along
Washington Street and HighWay 111 to advertise events in the Village, and this
is for the design of that banner program.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Weiss stated it has not yet been
determined whose direction the marketing campaign for the Ranch project will
be under. He noted GMA International is working on a logo and theme for the
project, and that at some poiint, the City will start actively marketing the retail
and hotel components of the project. He stated marketing of the golf course
could ultimately become a part of an operation contract, an extension of the
Kiner Goodsell contract, or a more-specialized marketing services contract.
City Council Minutes 8 April 1, 2003
Council Member Osborne stated he would like to see the $300,000 marketing
budget trimmed back since people seem to be coming to the City as opposed
to the City having to draw them in.
Council Member Sniff stated he feels it's premature to discuss implementation
of an advertising program for the Ranch. He feels some of the things in the
marketing proposal have lost their usefulness. He suggested updating the
infomercial and continuing with an easier-to-read newsletter. He supports
marketing commercial retail activities, and using factoids about the City. He
doesn't see any need for a banner program along Washington Street and
Highway 111 at this time. He suggested the possibility of having three or four
street fair events in the "new and complete" Village once the Avenida La Fonda
improvements and Old Town Center are complete. He also suggested reducing
the marketing budget to $150,000 or $175,000 until a decision is made
regarding activities in the Village and it's appropriate to start promoting the
Ranch golf course and hotel facilities. He asked about the timeline for
completing the Avenida La Fonda improvements.
Public Works Director Jonasson stated the Old Town development is expecting
to open in October or November and the City hopes to have these
improvements done at the same time.
Council Member Sniff stated he feels two or three events in the Village would
stimulate activity for the businesses.
Mayor Adolph spoke in support of continuing the infomercial and creating a City
calendar. He voiced concern about how the State budget may impact City
revenues, and noted it may be necessary to cut back on the marketing budget
to balance other needs of the City. He wished to look at the basics for
marketing.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Weiss stated he estimates the
proposed marketing contract will be 10-15% less than initially expected, based
on prior year contracts. As for the difference between the $200,000 and
$300,000 proposed for the marketing budget, he advised $5,000 is for Date
Festival sponsorship, $36,000 for contingency items, and $16,000 carried over
for the banner program. He noted there is $75,000 in the CIP for the banner
program infrastructure and the $16,000 carried over in the marketing budget
is for artwork and design. He explained the idea for the new banner program
is to have different banners for the four seasons, such as for the holidays, arts,
golf, and perhaps 4th of July. He asked for clarification on which programs the
Council would like to cut back on. He noted it may be beneficial to take another
City Council Minutes 9 April 1, 2003
look at the Kiner Goodsell contract to determine if it's appropriate to keep them
on retainer or to contract with them for specific activities.
Council Member Henderson noted it's difficult to determine how much to pare
back without seeing the marketing proposal but she feels a very small portion
of the budget should be for the City calendar and the newsletter.
Mr. Weiss confirmed a lot of the basic information for the newsletter is
produced by staff and Kiner makes it more readable.
Council Member Sniff stated he feels it would be helpful to have some figures
on these items.
Mr. Weiss stated staff can bring this back with some numbers if Council wants.
Council Member Henderson stated she feels the banner program should be
shelved for a while. As for the street fair, she noted it never became what the
Council wanted it to be economically, and it has cost a lot of money. She
would like to see it back but not with the City subsidizing it. She also noted a
street fair on Friday nights would create parking problems for the restaurants.
Council Member Sniff suggested the possibility of having them at a different
time of day. He just feels two or three would be good to introduce the new
Village.
Council Member Henderson stated she feels the idea has merit but has a
problem with subsidizing it. She noted Council may even have to take a look
at the cultural events that they indicated to the Cultural Arts Commission that
they would like to have next year.
Ms. Carter commented that they are working with Wells Marvin on the Old
Town marketing, and he is planning a lot of events that will bring people into
the area.
Council Member Henderson referenced a possibility of the City working together
with him on that.
Council Member Perkins stated he feels street fairs ~hould be done monthly or
they don't work out. He commented on how nice Palm Desert's brochure looks,
and stated he is not happy with the one put out by the La Quinta Chamber of
---- Commerce because it doesn't draw people's attention.
,
,
City Council Minutes 10 April 1, 2003
Ms. Carter stated the Chamber of Commerce is going out to bid for redesign but
she doesn't think they plan to change the paper material.
Council Member Osborne concurred with having some numbers for the various
components of the marketing proposal.
Council Member Henderson agreed it may be better to contract for specific
projects instead of having the consultant on retainer.
Council Member Sniff stated he would like to keep Kiner Goodsell on retainer
because they could be one of the firms considered for the Ranch project.
Council Member Sniff asked when it would be appropriate to initiate promotion
of the Ranch project.
Mr. Weiss advised staff has already begun to market the hotel pads and retail
component with potential developers as part of everyday work but no tangible
material has been developed. He stated firms with an interest in marketing
various elements of the project have already approached staff, and one firm has
indicated they should be involved as early in the process as possible in order to
be consistent in the presentation. He noted a revised concept for the project
will be coming back to the Agency on April 15, and if adopted, GMA will
package it so it can be used in marketing the site.
2. DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2003/2004.
Assistant City Manager Weiss presented the staff report.
Council Member Henderson noted not having a redlined-version of the document
made it harder to review. She referenced the last sentence in Paragraph 1
under 2003-04 Implementation Activities and Target Areas (Page 25), and
stated she was pleased to see the goal becoming a reality, and believes the City
will be able to diminish its active participation in developing the Highway 111
corridor.
Council Member Sniff noted the City's active participation has been mostly
promotional.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Weiss stated he is not aware of any
agreement for a new tenant to occupy the old Wal-Mart building, except for the
agreement that allows the City to acquire the building to ensure its occupancy.
City Council Minutes 11 April 1, 2003
? He stated a tenant has voiced interest.in the building but is active in other areas
of the State and is focusing on those areas until the local Wal-Mart is closer to
relocating.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Weiss stated he understands Wal-
Mart will be relocating before the end of the year.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Weiss stated as far as he knows
the interested tenant is not looking at other locations in the Valley.
Council Member Henderson referred to Page 11 (Social/Economic Overview),
and noted a lot of the City's permanent residents are retired and not employed
at all. She suggested some clarification in the language. She also questioned
a statement under Developable Land (Page 12) regarding prime parcels existing
in La Quinta to the north near Interstate 10, and suggested clarification.
Mr. Weiss explained the description was for orientation purposes, and that the
language was taken from the executive summary in the Design Workshop
report.
Council Member Sniff suggested "south" be changed to "southeast" in'the
same paragraph.
Mr. Weiss stated staff will try to get the language corrected, or will summarize
the excerpts instead of taking them directly from the document.
Council Member Sniff suggested deleting "live/work loft housing opportunities"
under The Village (Page 26).
Council Member Henderson agreed but noted if it is deleted, the door of
opportunity would be closed, and it is part of the Riverside County General Plan.
Council Member Perkins stated he didn't have a problem leaving it in.
Mayor Adolph stated he feels it would be more appropriate to change it to,
"continue to explore commercial development."
Council Member Henderson stated she doesn't have a problem adding
"commercial development" but suggested "live/work" also remain.
,-- In response to Council Member Osborne, Consultant Frank Spevacek stated
there is property in the Village north of the Frances Hack Park that could
accommodate "live/work" housing.
City Council Minutes 12 April 1, 2003
Council Member Osborne asked if this would allow office-in-the-home activity.
Mr. Spevacek stated the Community Development Director has indicated that
type of use can be accommodated in the Village. He confirmed the type of
work allowed would have to be stipulated.
Mayor Adolph asked if there would be a height-limitation problem having lofts
in that area.
City Manager Genovese noted the height limits under Village Commercial zoning
is different from the zoning in the Cove.
Council Member Sniff stated he supports adding "commercial development."
Council concurred.
Council Member Sniff stated he doesn't feel "affected" residents, under
Annexation Feasibility, is proper.
Council Member Henderson noted the language is the same as last year's
document.
Council Member Perkins suggested replacing "affected residents and
landowners" with "interested residents."
Council concurred.
Under Resort/Hospitality Opportunities, Council Member Sniff suggested
modifying the first bullet point to read, "Complete the Ranch Master Planning
activities and begin construction of Phase I development." He questioned the
need to list the specific projects.
Council Member Henderson noted the entire document lends itself to this kind
of conversational, ongoing of what the projects are.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Spevacek stated the third bullet
point includes resort and hospitality uses throughout the City and is not limited
to the Ranch site.
Council Member Perkins suggested adding, "throughout the City."
After a brief discussion, Council concurred to leave the language in the first
bullet point of Resort/Hospitality Opportunities as is.
City Council Minutes 13 April 1, 2003
Council Member Henderson pointed out the comments from Study Session Item
No. 1 need to be reflected in this document.
3. DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2003/2004.
Public Works Director Jonasson presented the staff report, and advised the CIP
will be brought back to the Council May 6, 2003.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Consultant Nick Nickerson stated
the Phase II Jefferson Street Improvements were in the CIP last year but the
numbers are being adjusted this year to reflect the amount that CVAG will be
advancing for the project.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Nickerson stated the City will be
responsible for 25% of the costs for the improvements within the City Limits.
If the cost estimate remains the same, the amount shown in the CIP will be the
City's total cost to be spent through the course of the project. He explained
CVAG will be advancing the funds for the project and billing the City for its
portion of the costs, and until then, the money will stay in this account.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Nickerson confirmed the
Highway 111 Street Improvements project on Page 24 is the potential sidewalk
between the Cliff House Restaurant and Point Happy development, and it
includes mitigating the rock fall hazard.
Council Member Henderson stated she understood the Council had decided
against the sidewalk, and that CalTrans had mitigated the rock hazard.
Mr. Nickerson stated CalTrans has indicated they feel minor scaling in the area
has solved the rock hazard for motor vehicles, and that the City would be
responsible for everything else if it decides to construct a sidewalk there.
Council Member Perkins voiced concern about having to encroach into the
mountain to construct an eight-foot wide sidewalk.
Mr. Nickerson stated there is sufficient space to construct the sidewalk without
encroaching into the mountain but, potentially, CalTrans would require the City
to assume the liability.
City Council Minutes 14 April 1, 2003
Council Member Henderson asked who would be liable if a pedestrian on the
sidewalk is hit by a vehicle, and if there would be a protection rail between the
street and the sidewalk.
Mayor Adolph agreed with the need to have some type of protection rail for
pedestrians.
Mr. Nickerson stated the area can be made safe if Council decides to construct
the sidewalk.
Council Member Henderson stated she is not comfortable with installing a
sidewalk in that area.
Council Member Perkins suggested the project be removed from the CIP.
Council Member Sniff commented on the need for some type of fence to protect
vehicles from falling rock.
Mr. Nickerson replied that staff is hesitant to go to CalTrans and ask to do
something in the right-of-way after they've sent a letter saying they have made.
the area safe.
Mr. Jonasson noted CalTrans has left a three-foot high concrete barrier along
the street and a six-foot high chain-link fence closer to the rocks. Should
Council decide not to install the sidewalk, he noted additional landscaping is
needed in the right-of-way across the street.
Council Member Henderson expressed concern about CalTrans leaving the
existing concrete barrier.
City Manager Genovese stated since CalTrans has provided the City with a rock
mitigation hazard plan, they can leave the barrier in place as long as they want
because it is their right-of-way. He noted if the City gets involved with any
type of fencing, they will put the liability on the City. He confirmed staff can
contact CalTrans to find out what they plan to do with the concrete barrier and
try to work with them to make it attractive.
Council Member Henderson agreed with eliminating the project except that
portion of it that allows the City to work with CalTrans on the outcome of the
concrete barrier.
Mr. Nickerson stated the Measure A funding can be used for improvements
within the right-of-way on Highway 111 but landscaping does not qualify.
City Council Minutes 15 April 1, 2003
Mr. Genovese stated fundings for the minor landscaping improvements across
the street can probably be done through the City's Lighting & Landscaping
contract with Lundeen. In summarizing Council's direction, he stated the area
will be left as is, and staff will try to work with CalTrans on the concrete barrier
or any other type of fencing that may be utilized to look more attractive.
Council Member Perkins questioned there being sufficient requests to install the
sidewalk to justify the cost.
Mayor Adolph noted the new affordable housing development in Indian Wells
has openings in the perimeter walls so their residents can walk to the shopping
centers. He stated they will need to cross the street to avoid the rock fall area,
and asked if there is any way to use the funding for another project.
Mr. Nickerson noted there are other cities with projects waiting in line for
funding. He advised the project will be pulled from the CIP and the funding held
until all of La Quinta's projects are approved to make sure there is no shortage.
Council Member Henderson stated she was surprised to see the Washington
Street Medians and Landscaping project (Page. 25) move up because it was on
the add list last year.
Mr. Genovese confirmed this project will finish Washington Street to its final
configuration.
Mr. Nickerson confirmed the funding will come from both the DIF and the
balance in the Infrastructure Fee Account.
Mr. Genovese explained one reason why the project was moved up is because
of the five-year timeframe limit for expending the developer fees collected under
the Infrastructure Fee Program..
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Jonasson stated one of the recurring projects
is drainage improvements along Washington Street. He advised these will be
reconfigured along with the St. Francis of Assisi's Church project.
Council Member Perkins asked if the frontage street woUld remain.
Planning Manager Orci stated the proposal is to eliminate the frontage road and
still have access in and out of the church and parking lot.
Council Member Perkins commented on the importance of allowing a right turn
out of the church.
City Council Minutes 16 April 1, 2003
Council Member Henderson noted traffic will be able to turn right out of the
parking lot and exit onto Washington Street at the future traffic signal at Lake
La Quinta Drive.
Mr. Orci stated the pending proposal is for the church driveway to go straight
to Washington Street where traffic will be able to turn right.
Council Member Perkins stated he feels that will be a mistake because of the
amount of traffic from the church.
Mr. Genovese advised the ingress/egress will be dealt with at a later time.
A brief discussed ensued regarding how the church and the Arts Foundation will
share the access at Lake La Quinta Drive.
Council Member Henderson noted this median project will add to the already-
deficient Lighting & Landscape Assessment District.
Mr. Genovese noted that issue will be brought back to Council to determine
whether or not to go out to a vote to address that problem.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Finance Director Falconer stated the
auto mall developer installed some public improvements along with the City a
few years ago, and the City agreed to reimburse the developer for their cost of
the improvements based on future sales tax from the three auto dealers. He
stated the City has an obligation to pay one third of the sales tax up to
$122,500, and if sales tax exceeds $500,000, there's another incentive
payment of $78,000.
Council Member Osborne asked if the fire station is already funded, to which
Mr. Nickerson responded, "Yes."
Council Member Sniff referenced Page 26 and asked for clarification, including
ownership of the building.
Mr. Genovese stated these are cost estimates for budgeting purposes while the
details of ownership are being worked out. He stated the improvements will
make the facility usable throughout the year, and noted there has been some
discussion about other improvements so the gym can be utilized at other times.
Council Member Sniff expressed concern that the Boys & Girls Club may be able
to allow someone else to move into the facility.
City Council Minutes 17 April 1, 2003
Council recessed to and until 7:00 p,m,
7:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Rigoberto & Viri Reyes, 51-015 Calle Obispo, stated their neighbor's driveway
encroaches approximately four feet into their property, and they need to know how
they can get it removed.
Council referred the matter to staff.
Christi Salamone, P. O. Box 777, Executive Director of the La Quinta Arts Foundation,
presented the City with a framed copy of the 2003 La Quinta Arts Festival Poster.
PRESENTATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACT ON AN APPEAL OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF JANUARY 28, 2003, TO
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA 2002-460) AND APPROVE A 14,560
SQUARE FOOT DRUG AND RETAIL STORE ON A 4.03-ACRE SITE LOCATED
AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 48.
APPELLANT: RANCHO LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
Council Member Perkins abstained due to a potential conflict of interest and left
the dais.
Associate Planner Maga~a presented the staff report and revised site plan (Site
Plan #2).
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Maga~a stated he understands
,-- the developer has changed from a double-head lighting fixture to a single-head
lighting fixture. He confirmed everything except the Walgreens building is
conceptual only and subject to modification by Council.
City Council Minutes 18 April 1, 2003
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Maga~a stated the Avenue 48 access
has been moved 45 feet further to the west, and is 250 feet from the
intersection, which meets the General Plan. He stated the accesses on Avenue
48 and Washington Street are right-in, right-out only, and referred a question
regarding the effect of changing to a single-head light fixture to the developer.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Maga~a confirmed the soil stabilization of the
Phase II area can be conditioned. The driveway on Washington Street is 30 feet
wide. The three-foot garden wall along the property line is proposed by the
developer. There will also be Iow shrubs outside of the wall area.
Council Member Henderson asked if the architectural standards, materials, and
landscaping remain the same for the revised site plan, to which Mr. Maga~a
responded, "yes."
Mayor Adolph noted the revised plan doesn't look like a strip mall like the
original plan looked.
Council Member Sniff asked if there would be deceleration lanes on Avenue 48
or Washington Street at the entrances to the project. Mr. Maga~a stated the
developer would have to dedicate additional property should the project be
conditioned to provide a deceleration lane.
Council Member Sniff suggested it be considered to get vehicles turning into the
driveway out of the way of fast-moving traffic.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
Tim O'Neil, 2920 East Camelback, Phoenix, Arizona, of Evergreen Devco,
reviewed an additional site plan (Site Plan #3) with further changes to Phase II
only. He noted this alternative moves the landscaping and architecture to the
perimeter of the site, while limiting the parking and traffic to the center of the
project. It allows Council to place certain conditions of approval on Phase I and
allows Evergreen to offer certain conditions of approval for Phase I that will
protect their interests in Phase II. Generally, those conditions are to require the
Phase II buildings to be on the site perimeter along Avenue 48 and Caleo Bay,
and the parking to be concentrated on the interior of the site to the fullest
extent possible. Additionally, to require a conditional use permit for any use
other than office or professional in Phase II, and to require the same lighting,
landscaping, and architectural standards as Phase I. He stated they are willing
to dedicate the land and assume the costs to construct a deceleration lane on
Washington Street. As for the lighting, this plan proposes two single-head, light
City Council Minutes 19 April 1, 2003
standards on Avenue 48, each~with 150 watt light bulbs. He urged Council to
support the site plan.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. O'Neil stated the developer for
Phase II supports the conceptual plan. As for Phase II soil stabilization, he
stated they are open to several options.
Council Member Osborne asked if they have put together an estimated financial
impact for the City on this project.
Ruben Garbett, of Evergreen Devco, stated they estimate 40% of their new
store sales will be non-taxable prescriptions, and will amount to approximately
$4 million in the first three years. Based on that amount and percentage, the
remaining 60% would result in an annual 1% tax amount of $25,000, and is
expected to increase to $40,000-$50,000 annually after the first three years.
As for employment, they expect to employ between 32 and 40 employees.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. O'Neil stated there is a five-foot landscape
setback between the wall on the north side of the property and the back of the
building.
Mayor Adolph asked if they would agree to condition the buildings in Phase II
to be architecturally designed so as not to look like the back of a building, to
which Mr. O'Neil responded, "yes." He added they expect to maintain the same
level of architecture in Phase II .that they have proposed in Phase I.
In response to Mayor Adolph, City Attorney Jenson confirmed the City Council
always has the right to revisit conditions of approval for a project and modify
them if deemed appropriate.
Council Member Osborne noted once the buildings are construCted, architectural
design is set and the use is the only thing that can change.
Council Member Henderson asked if there is a problem having a condition of
approval that requires allowed uses to have a conditional use permit.
Ms. Jenson stated it would not be consistent with the City Code, which defines
what permitted uses are and what is required to have a conditional use permit.
An alternative, she noted would be to limit, as a current Condition, the overall
square footage of retail use on the site.
City Council Minutes 20 April 1, 2003
Council Member Henderson asked how about requiring any use other than
medical or professional to come back to the Planning Commission but not
requiring a conditional use permit.
Ms. Jenson stated that would be preferable, and she wouldn't have a problem
with it as long as it is imposed with the developer's agreement.
Council Member Henderson noted sometime in the future a sandwich shop
might fit well in the complex to serve the medical and office clientele, and a
requirement for any use other than medical or professional to come back for
approval would provide some flexibility for a use that might make sense to have
in the complex.
Mayor Adolph asked if the use would come back to the City Council for
approval or just the Planning Commission. He noted the only reason this project
came before the City Council is because the Planning Commission decision was
appealed.
Council Member Henderson noted the City Council can condition the uses to
come back to the City Council for review.
Mr. O'Neil stated their goal is to create control on Phase II, and they are open
to different ideas on how to manage it.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. O'Neil stated the project's CC&Rs are
recorded against the property and define the operations, covenants, restrictions,
and controls that are recorded against the property. They propose getting an
approval from the City on the CC&Rs so there is mutual consent from
themselves and the City.
Emily Hemphill, 777 E. Tahquitz, Suite 328, Palm Springs, attorney representing
the applicant, stated in order to avoid the developer being able to modify the
CC&Rs once the project is approved, they propose requiring that the CC&Rs
cannot be amended without the City's approval, except for adjustments to the
dues. She noted Walgreens is the only item being approved at this time, and
that the only difference between Site Plans #2 and #3 is to demonstrate that
there is flexibility to meet the City's goals and objectives to serve the
neighboring property owners. In Site Plan #3 they moved the buildings in Phase
II in response to some of the concerns voiced in letters from the public to
minimize their concerns. She noted the condition proposed by the developer
provides the City with a mechanism and control to make sure Phase II meets
the City's goals and objectives.
City Council Minutes 21 April 1, 2003
James Duff, 78-625 Descanso~Lane, and Bill Ivey, 78-665 Descanso Lane,
representing the Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association, stated many of
their residents understood a medical facility would be built on this site when
they purchased their homes. Mr. Ivey stated they have reviewed the revised
site plan (Site Plan//2), and feel it is not what Council requested. They believe
the revised plan adversely rearranges the parking area adjacent to Avenue 48,
significantly reduces the landscape buffer, and does nothing to shield the
lighting. He then suggested the following conditions be placed on the project
if approved' 1) parking light standards limited to the interior of the site and to
18 feet high or the height of any single-story building on the site; 2) lighting
must meet the City's lighting ordinance, and they recommend a photo-metric
analysis be done to determine the best light standard height and fixture to
reduce glare; 3) locate all parking in the interior and prohibit parking on Avenue
48; 4) restore the 40-foot landscape setback along Avenue 48 and require
mature trees and shrubs along Avenue 48 to buffer traffic, noise, and lighting;
5) locate the Walgreens building a minimum of 150 east of Washington Street;
6) limit the tower roof line to 22 feet; 7) locate conceptual buildings 1 and 2
along Avenue 48 frontage to buffer the project from the surrounding
neighborhood; 8) restrict all building heights to single-story; 9) require Phase II
to be architecturally compatible with the Walgreens building; 10) construct
Phases I and II concurrently to ensure surrounding properties are buffered from
the Walgreens building, and to know the full impact of. the project; 11) require
deceleration lanes on Washington Street and Avenue 48; 12) try to mitigate the
traffic problem at Avenue 48 and Caleo Bay; 13) limit the Walgreens store and
drive-thru hours to 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.; 14) limit deliveries to the side of the
building that cannot be seen or heard by residents and limit main deliveries to
once a week; and 15) do not allow liquor sales on the premises nor retail uses
on the entire site. Mr. Duff stated he felt it was clear at the last meeting that
the developer was willing to limit Phase II to non-retail uses. He then requested,
if the project is approved, that the homeowners association be allowed to
review the conditions of approval and CC&Rs and comment on how they may
affect the homeowners.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Orci stated the maximum
building square footage on the site is 30% of the site. Additionally, the parking
requirements for medical and dental office versus general office vary, and there
are other standards that relate to the outcome of the size of the building and the
number of required parking spaces.
Council Member Henderson asked staff if the allowable square footage of
medical office space in Site Plan//2 had been assessed, and if Site Plan//3 is
within the allowable square footage.
City Council Minutes 22 April 1, 2003
Mr. Maga~a confirmed the square footage proposed in Site Plan//2 is within the
allowable amount. As for Site Plan //3, staff indicated the building square
footage amounts are not legible.
Mayor Adolph stated it appears to be within the allowable square footage if the
drawings are anywhere near scale.
Council Member Henderson noted the buildings in Mr. Ivey's site plan look to
be substantially larger than what would be allowed.
Mr. Maga~a stated the actual floor space proposed by the developer in Site Plan
//2 is 17,600 square feet, and if the buildings in Mr. Ivey's plan exceed that
amount they would be very close to the 30% of lot coverage.
Mr. Orci noted there are various issues related to determining building square
footage and orientation on the site.
Bill Bobb, 48-61 3 Paseo Tarazo, voiced safety concerns about having an access
on Washington Street between two close traffic signals.
Sam Spinello, 75-600 Mary Lane, Indian Wells, a member of the Phase II
development team, stated he supports the developer's latest site plan proposal.
Mayor Adolph asked if they would be developing all of the Phase II buildings,
to which Mr. Spinello responded, "yes."
Council Member Henderson asked about their time frame for Phase II.
Wesley Oliphant, 77-900 Avenue of the States, Palm Desert, encouraged the
Council to approve the developer's proposal. He stated their timeframe is based
on the market, and they anticipate phasing the project and not building all three
buildings at the same time. He stated they have tentatively commissioned the
architect who designed the Palm Desert National Bank at Washington Street and
Avenue 47, and anticipate developing Phase II of this site similar to the bank
site.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Oliphant stated most likely they
will construct the building just west of the Avenue 48 entrance first, and then
the one at the corner of Avenue 48 and Caleo Bay.
Council Member Henderson noted Phase II is not under consideration at this
time but she would like to know if he feels it's possible to achieve a project here
City Council Minutes 23 April 1, 2003
,,
that can mitigate, to the highest degree, a number of the concerns that have
been brought up.
Mr. Oliphant stated there is a higher degree of flexibility in developing
office/medical office buildings, and he believes the process they will go through
with staff will be adequate to protect all of the concerns.
Frank Christopher, 48-485 Vista Calico, stated the basic concept with the site
plan submitted by Mr. Ivey is to create a courtyard project in order to buffer
surrounding properties. He understands the easement with the future hotel site
is unavailable at this time to share the driveway entrance off of Washington
Street, and noted the property line needs to be shifted.
Don Rector, 46-450 Cameo Palms Drive, stated he feels the property should be
re-zoned professional/non-retail, and Walgreens should be relocated near Target
because there already is too much traffic on Washington Street. He also
commented on the potential of needing to look at the zoning for the Arts
Foundation property.
Steve Altman, of Rancho La Quinta, suggested some consideration be given to
having security gates for the parking lots after hours.
John Peruzzi, 8800 Venice Boulevard, Los Angeles, architect with Peruzzi
Architects, stated they have worked hard to design a beautiful building, and
urged Council to approve the project.
Jack Shelly questioned 'being able to approve the project without knowing what
the other three buildings will be.
In response to Mr. Ivey's proposed conditions, Ms. Hemphill stated there are
safety issues with the lighting that have to be addressed, which is why two
light standards are shown on Avenue 48. They have no problem with the 18-
foot height limit and with meeting the City's dark sky lighting ordinance. As for
a photo-metric analysis, she advised one has been done for the project by an
expert who has certified that the lighting meets the dark sky ordinance.
Mayor Adolph asked if the perimeter lighting could be addressed by Iow-level
lighting and building lighting.
Ms. Hemphill stated any lighting on the building that was sufficient to light the
area would be too bright, and no one would like it. She noted by having light
standards on the perimeter they can be shielded so the light doesn't shine
toward the adjacent homes.
City Council Minutes 24 April 1, 2003
Regarding the parking in Phase II, she stated they have tried to provide a
condition where substantially all of the parking will be within the interior. She
noted the setback requirements on Washington Street result in some parking on
Washington Street, and they have tried to minimize the parking on Avenue 48.
She also noted the project already exceeds the required landscape setback on
Avenue 48 by 50%, and explained it was reduced in the revised plan to address
safety and circulation issues related to parking. The landscaping will be
significant and is the same as originally proposed. She explained the distance
of Walgreens from Washington Street was done to line up the store with the
office building to help buffer the view from the homes in Rancho La Quinta.
As for the tower height, she reviewed line-of-sight drawings showing that the
visual impact of the tower is minor, and noted it meets City standards. They
feel the tower is important to the architectural look of the building, and that the
proposed condition would not be appropriate. She stated the conceptual
buildings will come back at a later time for approval, and that concurrent
construction of all buildings on the site is not possible because the phasing of
construction depends on absorption in the market. She noted the developer has
agreed to provide deceleration lanes if the City wants them.
In regard to the Caleo Bay/Avenue 48 intersection, she stated they feel the
improvements and re-striping recommended by staff are appropriate and within
the General Plan. As for store hours, she noted Walgreens is typically open 24
hours a day but has agreed to reduce the hours of service at this location to
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. She added the closing time may change later on,
depending on what the local market demands, but it will not be later than 10:00
p.m.
Regarding truck deliveries, she stated they will be on the opposite side of the
building from Rancho La Quinta, and the office building will screen the area for
Lake La Quinta residents. She stated the issue of deliveries once a week has
been previously addressed by Mr. O'Neil and they don't see any change, and
they have already agreed to no liquor sales. Regarding retail uses, they have
proposed what they feel is the best way to handle that issue for both the
developer and the City.
Mr. Duff stated they were told by staff that a photo-metric analysis had not
been done, and if one exists, they would like to see it. Additionally, they feel
a deceleration lane is also needed on Avenue 48.
Bob Fredricks, 48-105 Via Solano, stated he will see the tower from his back
yard, and that disturbs him. He voiced concern that Walgreens will come back
at a later date and ask to stay open 24 hours and to sell liquor.
City Council Minutes 25 April 1, 2003
There being no further requests :to .speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. UagaRa stated a photo-metric
study was done on the original plan, and a copy was given to the homeowners
association.
Council Member Henderson asked how moving the Washington Street entrance
to the south will affect traffic turning right into the front parking area of
Walgreens, and is there a way to avoid severe right turns.
Mr. Orci stated a deceleration lane will help to slow traffic.
Public Works Director Jonasson stated moving the first parking stalls to the east
would provide a greater turning radius.
Mayor Adolph asked if Walgreens provides an easement to the property to the
north, in order to move the driveway, what would be the affect on their parking.
Council Member Henderson noted the driveway issue was brought up under the
original plan.
Mr. Orci stated the project is conditioned to either acquire rights to put in a full
driveway as indicated on the site plan, or to relocate it south onto their property
and provide access to the future project to the north.
Council Member Henderson noted the property on the north side will probably
not be used much, and some of the parking there may have to be eliminated.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Maga~a stated delivery trucks will
enter from Caleo Bay and exit onto Washington Street.
Council Member Osborne stated he feels the lighting issue has been minimized,
and he supports having a deceleration lane on Washington Street. He further
supports any use other than office and medical coming before the City's
planning process. He agrees with the CC&Rs, as proposed by the developer,
maintaining the architectural design for the entire site. He noted any future
requests by Walgreens to allow liquor sales would come before the City for
public comment. As for traffic, he doesn't feel this project will generate any
major change because most of the people who will use this store live south of
Highway 111. Regarding the issue of crime, he noted the Police Department
has indicated any change due to this project would be minimal.
City Council Minutes 26 April 1, 2003
Council Member Henderson noted this property is zoned appropriately for what
the developer has proposed, and protecting his right to do that is part of the
Council's responsibility, along with trying to make sure it's the best
development possible. She noted the developer has proposed three alternative
site plans that indicate what can be done on the site, along with a proposed
condition that covers a number of the issues of concern regarding Phase II. She
feels this is the appropriate time to condition certain requirements in Phase II,
within the flexibility allowed, to ensure that what is produced in Phase II is what
best meets the needs of the surrounding communities. She stated if that can
be achieved by land-massing the buildings, then so be it. She feels the
developer's proposed hours of operation is reasonable. She believes the lighting
has been improved and meets, not only the City's current standards, but also
meets what is coming to the City as a recommendation from the lighting
consultant who is currently reviewing the City's lighting ordinance. She feels
the proposed condition will come close to addressing all the concerns without
violating the City's ordinances.
Council Member Sniff complimented the developer on making a major good-faith
effort in their proposal, and the residents for their input. He still has some
concerns about the lighting and increase in traffic. He also voiced safety
concerns about large delivery trucks trying to negotiate a right turn onto
Washington Street in front of fast-moving traffic. He feels these are over-riding
issues, and unless they can be satisfied, he has trouble supporting this.
Mayor Adolph stated he hasn't changed his mind about the project, and still
feels it should be in the complex closer to Highway 111. He believes the
entrance on Washington Street is an accident waiting to happen, and that
Avenue 48 will also get more traffic. He feels the Council made somewhat of
a commitment to the Lake La Quinta residents to mitigate the traffic on Caleo
Bay by approving Iow-profile businesses in this area. He is not against
Walgreens but cannot support the project because he feels this location is too
close to residential.
Council Member Henderson noted this property was down-zoned when the
General Plan was approved without any indication that a Walgreens would not
be allowed, and she feels the Council must uphold the integrity of the City's
zoning ordinances covering this property. She supports adding a condition
requiring a deceleration lane on Washington Street, and is prepared to move
forward with the project.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Jenson confirmed the matter before
the Council is an appeal of a Planning Commission decision. She advised
Section 9.200.1 20 defines what actions may be taken by the City Council in
City Council Minutes 27 April 1, 2003
review of an appeal. The Council may sustain, reverse, or modify the original
decision, or refer it back to the Planning Commission. An action by the City
Council to reverse or modify the appealed decision requires a majority vote, and
if there is a tie, the original decision by the Planning Commission stands.
Council Member Sniff asked if an additional motion on a modified project can
be made if there is a tie vote on the appeal, to which Ms. Jenson replied, "yes."
Council Member Henderson asked if a motion can be made to uphold the
Planning Commission's decision with modifications, and Ms. Jenson responded,
"yes."
Council Member Sniff stated the problem with that is that it needs three
affirmative votes, and if not, the motion is dead.
Council Member Henderson noted another motion could be made with
modifications.
Council Member Sniff suggested dealing with the appeal, and pending the
results of that motion, introduce an additional motion seeking a majority.
Council Member Henderson stated she was unclear why a tie vote on the appeal
would not end the process.
Ms. Jenson explained the Code allows another motion to be made after a failed
motion as long as it is at the same meeting.
MOTION -It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Osborne to adopt a
resolution of the City Council upholding the Planning Commission's decision of
January 28, 2003, with modifications (regarding the application filed by
Evergreen Devco for a Walgreens drug store).
Council Member Henderson asked the City Attorney if she feels the conditions
proposed by the developer satisfy the significant number of issues discussed
this evening, including the additional security with the CC&Rs.
Ms. Jenson recommended adding a condition that requires the City's consent
to mod/fy any of the CC&Rs dealing w/th these issues. Additionally, she
suggested modifying a portion of the first sentence in the first condition to read,
"....further concentrates parking and lighting .... " Regarding the second
condition she recommended modifying it to read," ..... applicable zoning may be
allowed only after going through a planning process that provides a sirni/ar level
of City and public review as a conditional use permit. Uses other than off/ce or
City Council Minutes 28 April 1, 2003
medical uses shall not be permitted unless the uses are approved by the City
Council"
Council Member Henderson suggested the last sentence in the first condition be
modified to read, "....complies with this condition to achieve the most beneficial
end product for the surrounding neighbors."
Ms. Jenson recommended changing it to, "....complies with this condition and
minimizes the impacts on surroundinq residential properties."
Council Member Henderson noted the Public Works Department will need to
work on the safety issues related to the Washington Street entrance.
Staff asked if a condition requiring a deceleration lane on Washington Street
should be included, and if a revised photo-metric analysis, based on the
proposed light standards, should be required.
Mr. Jonasson asked if the requirement for a deceleration lane on Washington
Street would still stand if the general plan amendment is not approved.
Council Member Henderson answered affirmatively to both questions.
Council Member Sniff asked to have the motion repeated, and asked if it should
include denial of the appeal.
Ms. Jenson reiterated that the action on an appeal can be to sustain, reverse,
or modify the original decision. She stated the motion is to modify the original
Planning Commission decision, as shown on Site Plan #3, adding the two
conditions of approval proposed by the developer as modified (first condition --
in the first sentence insert "lighting" after the word parking, at the end of the
last sentence add, "and minimizes the impacts on surrounding residential
properties," and add a provision to the condition that states the portion of the
CC&Rs that encompass these restrictions shall not be subject to amendment
without the approval of the City; second condition -- change "with a
conditional use permit approved by the City" to "...only after going through a
planning process that provides a similar level of City and public review as a
conditional use permit. Uses other than office and medical uses shall not be
permitted unless the uses are approved by the City Council.";) modifying
Condition No. 36(A) to make the deceleration lane required and not conditioned
upon a general plan amendment; and adding a condition requiring a photo-metric
analysis be completed on the revised plan in order to demonstrate compliance
with the City's dark sky requirements and other requirements imposed under the
City Code.
City Council Minutes 29 April 1, 2003
Motion failed with a tie vote with Council Member Sniff and Mayor Adolph
voting NO.
In response to Council Member Henderson, confirmed the tie vote results in the
Planning Commission action being upheld unless another action is taken by the
Council.
Council Member Henderson stated she feels Site Plan #3 is far superior to the
original plan, and it's a shame not to take the opportunity to gain the extra
protection on this site.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Osborne/Henderson to modify
the
original Planning Commission decision, as shown on Site Plan #3, adding the
two conditions of approval proposed by ~the developer as modified (first
condition -- in the first sentence insert "lighting" after the word parking, at the
end of the last sentence add, "and minimizes the impacts on surrounding
residential properties," and add a provision! to the condition that states the
portion of the CC&Rs that encompass these restrictions shall not be subject to
amendment without the approval of the City; second condition -- change "with
· · ' ' " " ' h
a conditIonal use permit approved by the C~t~/ to ...only after going throug
a planning process that provides a similar le~vel of City and public review as a
conditional use permit. Uses other than office and medical uses shall not be
permitted unless the uses are approved b~/ the City Council.";) modifying
Condition No. 36(A) to make the decelerationlane required and not conditioned
upon a general plan amendment; adding a condition requiring a photo-metric
analysis be completed on the revised plan in order to demonstrate compliance
with the City's dark sky requirements and other requirements imposed under the
City Code; and requiring a 40-foot setback along Avenue 48. Motion failed with
a tie vote with Mayor Adolph and Council Member Sniff voting NO.
Council Member Henderson asked if there is a way to revisit Site Plan #3 and
maybe get approval for it.
Ms. Jenson advised the City Code has a provision whereby the developer can
apply for an amendment, and has a procedure for an amendment to be issued
by the City Council. She added the Council Rules of Procedure allows a motion
to reconsider the matter to be made by a Council Member who voted with the
majority, but in this situation there was no majority. She explained the City
Code has two sections dealing with the amendment process, Modifications by
Applicant and Amendments to Development Review Permits. Under
- .. Amendments to Development Review Permits, she stated it's not very clear
~ who initiates the amendment. She added it has to be filed within the time
period of the original permit and has to be processed in the same manner as the
City Council Minutes 30 April 1, 2003
original application, which in this case would have to go before the Planning
Commission for approval and is appealable to the City Council. Under the
section, Modification by Applicant, it states the applicant must submit a request
to the Community Development Director who in turn has to determine whether
or not the modification is minor and will not result in a significant change. The
Community Development Director can approve the amendment if there is no
significant change, otherwise it has to be referred to the Planning Commission.
In her opinion, she didn't feel this would be a minor change.
Mayor Adolph noted the Community Development Director determined the
changes made by the Hideaway project were minor, and these changes are less
significant than those.
In response to Council Member Osborne, Ms. Jenson stated there is a process
for taking amendments directly to the City Council, if the original decision-
making authority was the City Council.
·
Mr. Jonasson stated a parcel map application has been filed in the Community
Development Department but it has not yet been reviewed by the Public Works
Department.
Mayor Adolph stated he hopes, if the amendment is filed, that the Community
Development Director is able to consider the changes minor.
Council Member Henderson noted the developer received approval tonight and
can therefore close their escrow. However, if they file an amendment and the
world turns upside down during that process, they could lose their approval.
Ms. Hemphill stated they have a large, non-refundable deposit due tomorrow
morning for purchase of the property, and are concerned about requesting an
amendment to go with Site Plan #3 and end up with nothing. If the amendment
is denied and they still have their original approval, then they would probably be
willing to consider it.
Ms. Jenson stated the amendment is all that is affected if the amendment fails.
Ms. Hemphill requested a letter from the City Attorney stating the original
approval will remain in place if the amendment is denied.
Council Member Henderson asked the City Attorney if she has a problem putting
that in writing, to which Ms. Jenson replied, "No."
City Council Minutes 31 April 1, 2003
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Desert Resorts Regional Airport Authority -- Council Member Osborne reported there
has been discussions about adding hangers at the airport, and the County is working
with CVWD to provide sufficient water for proper development at the airport.
Council Member Henderson noted it's actually a lack of appropriate infrastructure, and
CVWD continues to make it expensive for the airport.
All other reports were noted and filed.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS - None
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS
Council Member Perkins requested a proclamation be placed on the next agenda in
support of our troops in combat but doesn't want the proclamation to comment on
whether or not the war is good or bad.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved by Council Members
Henderson/Osborne to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
%TDd~. JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California