Loading...
2006 01 17 CC Minutes LA GUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2006 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: ABSENT: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Sniff, Mayor Adolph Council Member Perkins PUBLIC COMMENT - None CLOSED SESSION 1 . Conference with City's real property negotiator, Douglas R. Evans, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning potential terms and conditions of acquisition and/or disposition of real property located southwest of the intersection of Highway 111 and La Quinta Centre Drive. Property Owner/Negotiator: Stamko Development Company. 2. Conference with City's Legal Counsel regarding pending litigation, (1) City of La Quinta v. Eugene T. Feack and Carol A. Feack, etc., et aI, Riverside Superior Court Inc 045225 pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). 3. Conference with City's Legal Counsel regarding pending litigation, (1) Artistic Entertainment Services, LLC DBA Festival Artists Worldwide v. Coachella Valley Arts Alliance, et aI, Orange County Superior Court Case 05CC12907, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). 4. Conference with City's real property negotiator, Thomas P. Genovese, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning potential terms and conditions of acquisition and/or disposition of real property located at the northwest corner of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive. Property Owner/Negotiators: Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC and Embassy Suites La Quinta. Council recessed to the Redevelopment Agency and to Closed Session to and until the hour of 3:00 p.m. City Council Minutes 2 January 1 7, 2006 3:00 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 3:08 p.m. with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. Mayor Adolph led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT Scott Arthur, 43845 Milan Court, spoke regarding businesses in the City not actively promoting SilverRock Resort and suggested the operator's aren't getting the word out about the availability of the driving range, etc. At this point Council Member Osborne left the dais at 3: 11 p.m. due to the close proximity of his home to the subject property Mr. Arthur wished to address. Mr. Arthur ·asked when the Council will be considering the Palm Royale Drive extension again. City Manager Genovese advised it is tentatively scheduled for the next meeting on February 7, 2006. Mr. Arthur then expressed his thanks to the City Attorney for helping him to understand some of the details of funding a retention basin renovation in his community. Council Member Osborne returned to the dais at 3: 17 p.m. Robert Cox, 78315 Crestview Terrace, thanked the City for working out the construction traffic problem caused by use of the rear gate of the Point Happy Estates project. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Council Member Osborne requested item No. 2 on the Consent Calendar be moved to the Business Session as item No.2. ANNOUNCEMENTS - None PRESENTATIONS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None - --_._-_.~~-_._----~~. ..- .~ City Council Minutes 3 January 17, 2006 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Council Member Henderson requested a correction on page five of the minutes (third paragraph) to change Palm Springs Library to Palm Springs City Hall. MOTION: It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to approved the minutes as corrected. The motion was carried with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED JANUARY 17, 2006. 2. RECEIVE AND FILE TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF NOVEMBER 30, 2005. 3. RECEIVE AND FILE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR NOVEMBER 30, 2005 AND INVESTMENT SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2005. 4. AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEND THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL CLERKS TO BE HELD IN ANAHEIM, CA, MAY 13 THROUGH MAY 18, 2006. 5. APPROVAL OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, THE CITY OF INDIO, THE CITY OF COACHELLA, AND THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO SHARE THE COST OF A LADDER TRUCK COMPANY. 6. DENIAL OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED BY NORTH AMERICAN ELITE INSURANCE CO. - DATE OF LOSS, MAY 25,2005. 7. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATED ITEMS FROM THE JIM MURRAY SilverRock CHALLENGE. 8. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT MAP NO. 32279, MIRAGE AT LA QUINTA, STANDARD PACIFIC COACHELLA VALLEY. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended and amended with the exception of Item No. 2 and with Item Nos. 7 and 8 being approved by RESOLUTION NOS. 2006-007 through 2006-008 respectively. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. City Council Minutes 4 January 17, 2006 Council Member Henderson commented on the new Ladder Truck that was just approved and that had been on display prior to and during some of the meeting. Council Member Sniff asked how quickly this equipment can get on-scene in La Ouinta from its permanent location in Indio. Battalion Chief Dorian Cooley responded the agreement calls for the truck to be on site anywhere in the City of La Ouinta within 15 minutes. He answered questions regarding the trucks' ability to reach the top of very high buildings and its elevated high pressure stream hose capability stating it is able to be extended to 100 feet and the stream allows for an elevated source of water. Council Member Henderson asked about the turning radius of this large vehicle. Chief Cooley responded the ladder truck will turn in a tighter radius than the fire engines because it has dual steering capability front and ba'ck. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF RECIPIENT FOR THE DESERT SENIOR. INSPIRATION AWARD PROGRAM. Mayor Adolph excused himself and left the dais due to a potential conflict of interest created by the fact his wife is one of the nominees for this honor. City Manager Genovese, acting as the Interim Community Services Director presented the staff report. MOTION: It was moved by Council Members· Osborne/Henderson to approve the nomination of Diane Adolph to be the City of La Ouinta's honoree for 2006. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. 2. RECEIVE AND FILE TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF NOVEMBER 30, 2005 Council Member Osborne addressed his concerns regarding the City's rate of return on investments for the past year and a half. He said his research shows approximately $600,000 in revenue was not made on the funds available to be invested, over that period of time as compared to the benchmark which is the six-month U.S. Treasury Bills. He explained that he is not asking his fellow Council Members to direct the investments be made more aggressively, or that the risk be raised, only that the investments receive more attention and additional tools be given to staff to achieve that City Council Minutes 5 January 17, 2006 objective. He discussed the recommendation to hire a professional money manager that has been discussed by the Investment Advisory Board and his research shows if a professional money manager were retained with the cost based on paying one-quarter percent, it would still net over $250,000 per year in additional revenue within the City's current investment policy. Council Member Osborne recommended either the City hire a money manager or someone to be on staff, who can spend the required time to increase the rate of return and insure liquidity. He noted, during the 7 years he was on the City's Investment Advisory Board, the City consistently earned nlore than the 6-month Treasury bill yield. For the past 1 9 months the City has earned below that benchmark and he felt it was an indicator something needs to be done about the methods currently being used. Council Member Henderson responded that she is not sure the return on the investments has been a long term situation and felt that staff has not requested any additional help or indicated they felt a need to retain an investment advisor. She indicated she feels until the City Manager indicates a need for additional investment assistance she isn't prepared to consider that suggestion. Council Member Sniff suggested Council Member Osborne make a written proposal to the City Council for action. He indicated he isn't comfortable with a verbal recommendation that the Council and Staff can't study and base their recommendations on. He felt it is reasonable to make a request of Council Member Osborne to prepare a report that the Finance Director can look at as well as the Council and Investment Advisory Board. Mayor Adolph said he doesn't oppose taking a look at doing something different, but his major concern is the security of the city's reserves and if there are ways to maintain that security he would be open for changes. He expressed confidence in the Finance Director's ability to follow the Council's direction with regard to making investments. Council Member Osborne responded that he is not CritiCIZing staff but he feels that the economy has been going up over the past 1 9 months and the rate of return on the City's investments has been going down. He further stated he would be more than happy to go to a meeting of the Investment Advisory Board to discuss his concerns with them since the Board is composed of individuals who are more knowledgeable than he and have many more years of experience than he has in banking and investments. City Council Minutes 6 January 17, 2006 MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson that Council Member Osborne prepare his proposals in writing to be presented to the Investment Advisory Board and the Finance Director for any recommendations and if appropriate, those be returned to the City Council for consideration. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson that the City Council receive and file the Treasurer's Report. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. STUDY SESSION 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COACHELLA VALLEY MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN. Community Development Director Doug Evans presented the staff report and introduced a representative from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CV AG), Jim Sullivan and Katie Barrows and Bill Haebert representing the Coachella Valley Mountain Conservancy, in attendance to assist with any questions. Director Evans advised the Council that staff is recommending the City not enter into the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("Plan") until after the 30-day statute of limitations period has expired on any litigation that may be filed during that period. He stated this is a 75-year plan that is very complex and covers an approximate area of 1.2 million acres. The "Plan" will allow "take" of a number of identified species and provide for mitigation for I'taking" by providing for conservation of covered species. Jim Sullivan showed a lengthy power-point presentation outlining the areas within the corporate boundaries of. La Quinta that would be affected by the plan. The GIS maps showed the toe of the slope property, the alluvial fans, the Travertine area, Section 5, and the Green properties. The maps called out the areas included in the Plan and the areas subject to the Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) process. At the request of Director Evans he pointed out the section of Travertine which the developers have agreed to conserve. He also pointed out the area of the Green/Ministrelli property that would not be subject to the HANS process that had earlier showed up as being included. ---...-.-----.......--.., -..- -.--...-.--- City Council Minutes 7 January 17, 2006 Council Member Osborne questioned the acronyms used such as FWS and CDFG. Director Evans replied they stand for Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. Council Member Henderson asked where the HANS process came from; has it been used before; and is it necessary to have such a process to get buy-in from the other agencies such as Fish and Game and the Bureau of Land Management. Director Evans responded that it has been used before but he is not aware of what other areas have used such a process. Bill Haebert of the Coachella Valley Mountain Conservancy Agency responded the HANS process was part of the Western Riverside County MSHCP and that plan has been in existence for just over a year. He said they indicate the timeline, to go through that process, is about 45 days. He pointed out the HANS process in the Coachella Valley Plan is only used in areas of Peninsular Bighorn Sheep habitat. He said in most conservation areas take allocation either meets the conservation objectives or it doesn't, but in the Coachella Valley Plan there was significant concern with regard to the Bighorn Sheep because they are so wide-ranging. He explained it could lead to problems for the species such as fragmentation, cutting of corridors and so forth, Since the HANS process had already been created and was in use it was an available model to use under the circumstances in the Coach ell a Valley Plan. Council Member Henderson said what she wanted to know is if the HANS process is a plan that other agencies such as Fish and Game and Bureau of Land Management specifically were familiar with and wanted included in the Coachella Valley Plan. Mr. Haebert responded the program was crafted for the Western Riverside County Plan by an advisory group not specifically by the wildlife agencies. Council Member Henderson asked, with regard to Eagle Mountain, why it is suggested that the funding not be simply a fee based on a nexus rather than a tax on assessments. Director Evans responded the Plan responded to questions by providing a list of all other funding methods to replace the anticipated tipping fees. He said most of the responses to the Request for Comments articulated new fees or taxes. Mr. Haebert added that the situation with Eagle Mountain is, should it not go forward and should the funding not become available in the next four or five years, the CVCC has been given an array of funding mechanisms that have been used elsewhere. City Council Minutes 8 January 17, 2006 With the assistance of Jim Sullivan, using a power point with overlays, Mr. Haebert finalized his presentation by discussing the benefits of adopting the Plan. He said it will be a method to simplify the permitting process by making it simply a matter of writing a check for the permit fee for all projects outside of the conservation area.. He pointed out five major Interstate 10 interchanges in the Coach ell a Valley which have gone through extensive reviews trying to get approval from the wildlife organizations. He stated had a plan such as this been in place when they began the process, the interchanges would be completed now and relieving the congestion problems. If the Plan is approved this year, those projects will be covered. He advised regional projects are also covered and decisions with regard to Incidental Take Permits will become local decisions. Mr. Haebert stated another benefit is developments outside of the conservation areas will no longer be required to do biological surveys as part of their EIR's. He also pointed out that about 60,000 acres have been acquired in the past several years with State and Federal dollars. He did caution that the existing MOU regarding the Fringed Toed Lizard Take Area is about to expire, however, the various wildlife agencies have indicated they will not make any changes as long as the CVMSHCP is still going forward. He said if the Plan is not approved, it is fairly certain Fish and Wildlife will seek revocation of the Fringed Toed Lizard Permit and Fish and Game will simply stop issuing permits. He also said there are a number of species listed in the plan that presently are not covered and it is very likely they will become listed under the Endangered Species Act if the Plan isn't approved. RECESS: The Mayor declared a short recess at 5:09 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 5:21 p.m. Mr. Haebert touched on some of the points contained in Director Evans presentation as follows: · The SilverRock project is not affected as to construction restrictions, it is outside of the conservation area. · Travertine is also outside the conservation area. · The Green Specific Plan is outside the conservation area. Director Evans clarified that his comments were limited to the Section Five property and said should someone own a piece of property in that area and wish to build a home there, they would have to start and stop the construction due to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep lambing season. -- - -- -_. _..~ ------"----- ~-- ----- City Council Minutes 9 January 17, 2006 Council Member Henderson questioned if there would be a way for someone to avoid the stop and start process to build in Section Five. Mr. Haebert responded that would require a plan amendment process. He addressed the connector trail shown on the map and said it is not in the conservation area. Director Evans, however, expressed concern that it needs to be made a definite part of the trails system so it isn't moved at a later date to along the top of the BOR dike. He said it would not be at all suitable for establishing a trail since roadways will be going up and over it. Katie Barrows, explained the trail along the top of the dike was of particular importance to the equestrian community to be included in the plan to connect the trails from Monroe Street and continue down into the Martinez Canyon area which is a very popular ride for the equestrians. She said Steven De La Torre, representing Travertine has also shown a trail that could be built in the corridor along the BOR dike that is public land. Director Evans showed the area outside the conservation area that can contain the connector trail and indicated the MSHCP doesn't need to address a trail. He feels if it is shown in the plan there is the possibility it could be moved to a less desirable location. Steven De La Torre, representing Travertine said the lines going to the south and west of Travertine were agreed to by all of the agencies in May of 2005 and they will be included in the final permits from the Service as trails. He said there may be an informal trail along the top of the dike and the Park District is a long way from getting that worked out. He said the actual trail has only been located within the corridor established in 2005 and there may well be legal and illegal trails established over time. He said it is Travertine I s position that people will still have access to the rockslide area by using Madison Street. Mr. Haebert then addressed the composition of the Reserve Management Oversi~~ht Committee, and said the CVCC is responsible to appoint that oversi~Jht committee and since all the cities and agencies are members of the CVCC he feels it is safe to assume the CVCC will probably appoint five permitees to serve on the Reserve Management Committee. Council Member Osborne asked that the Question and Answer period start so the Council's questions can be addressed. The City Council unanimously concurred. City Council Minutes 10 January 17, 2006 Council Member Osborne posed the following questions: · How were the increased fees determined. Response: Mr. Haebert - A marketing study was first performed to determine the value of the land within the conservation areas and that provided the base data for the Nexus Study. The Nexus Study was the study which established the per acre fee for the acquisition of the land. · Of the 240,000 acres within the conservation areas how much needs to still be acquired? Response: Mr Haebert - 180,000 acres remain and the Federal Agencies will acquire 90,000 and the local permittees will be required to acquire the remaining 90,000 acres. · The City has objected to the inclusion of Perennial Rye Grass on the list as being a poison to the Bighorn Sheep. Response: Mr Haebert - It could be considered a poison but the concern was that it is invasive. However, it is no longer included in the plan. · How accurate is the Water Resources Conservation Map. Is the CVCC going to approve that at some future time? Response: Mr. Haebert - There is a Water Resources Map that is not included within the plan because it is not totally inclusive of every source of water at this time. · Are the fees geared to promote high densities? Response: Mr. Haebert - It is really geared toward the average within those densities and the Plan takes into consideration the indirect as well as the direct effects of construction. The fees are a rather small increment per unit and if developers feel the market will support single family units they will continue to build that kind of development. Council Member Henderson interjected, due to the location of the acreage, she doesn't feel there will be a rush to build 1 5 units to the acre, but it could encourage interest in building low/mod income housing. · Council Member Osborne asked, given the probability that the tipping fees from Eagle Mountain may not be generated, what new taxes and assessments are being considered to offset that? Is the per acre fee related to that. Response: Mr. Haebert - No they are not related. The per-acre fee is based solely on private development and the impacts of them. The Eagle Mountain fees are to fund other components of the Plan, such as monitoring and management of acquired lands. ---- --_. -~--- _._--- ------ - ~---- ~~----- City Council Minutes 11 January 17, 2006 Government Code Section 66000 says you can't charge private development for those monitoring and management costs. Director Doug Evans asked if the tipping fees from Eagle Mountain aren't available as a funding source along with six of the eight other options that require voter approval, what then would be the next scenario for funding. Response: At some point the local jurisdictions would have to work with the wildlife agencies to work out how to fund monitoring and management of the acquired lands. The various options would all need to be explored including those that require voter approval and if that wasn't successful other sources would need to be used. . Council Member Osborne asked if the tipping fees aren't available and the other methods are unsuccessful with the voters, can the City's general fund be affected. Response: Mr. Haebert - the CVCC has the responsibility to implement the Plan not the individual permittees. While provisions for levying fees against the permittees are in place, the CVCC has authority to approve those fees and the member agencies comprise the CVCC. He said an administrative trust fund was established, requiring $1 .00 for every ton dumped at Eagle Mountain to be deposited into this fund. The agreement establishing the trust fund spelled out one of the major ways it could be used was the implementation of a Coachella Valley MSHCP. Mr. Haebert stated at this time there is no reason to assume that the Eagle Mountain project will not occur. Council Member Osborne said he applauds all the effort that has gone into this plan to get all the entities together but he doesn't see it going forward by April, 2006. Mr. Haebert then went over the handout that had been distributed to the Council and outlined the HANS process, including the incidental take determination and the time periods involved in each step of the negotiations. Mayor Adolph asked if the time periods would be calendar or work days. Response: The time periods are all calendar days. Community Development Director Evans asked, what would happen if a property owner, at the end of the 300 + days, were to say they don't want to sell the property because they wished to build a single-family home on one parcel within the conservation area. Response: There would be a number of different ways to approach the property, but if Fish and Wildlife were to deny the permit to go forward for development on the local level, City Council Minutes 12 January 17, 2006 there would be additional opportunities to appeal that decision and it would be highly unlikely the whole Plan would be put in jeopardy because of one single-family home. If the Plan is in place at that point, the Wildlife agencies would not make the determination it would be done by the CCAC. Mr. Haebert concluded that the greater benefit needs to be placed in its proper proportion as it relates to an exceptional situation such as the one described. · Council Member Henderson asked for a clarification on the fee structure, as to acre or unit. Response: Mr. Haebert - Per unit applies to residential, everything else, such as golf courses, commercial developments, etc. is per acre. RECESS: The City Council called a recess at 6:06 p.m. and announced the Study Session will be continued after the Public Hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m. - Continued on Page 23. 7:00 P.M. Mayor Adolph called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and invited the public to comment on items not on the agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT Lori Fahnestock, 80065 Vista Grande, asked about the status of the emergency gate between the La Ouinta Apartments and Calle Serena stating it had been closed briefly and someone rammed it. She said additional work has been done but it remains open. City Engineer/Public Works Director Tim Jonasson said the City of Indio's City Engineer advised him Indio was just going to install an electric gate per their agreement with the Apartment owners. He said he went to inspect that project during the weekend and the City of Indio has, in fact, formed in a driveway apron in the City of La Ouinta's right-of-way without a permit or approval. Ms. Fahnestock left photos for the record showing the trash and graffiti still occurring on the cul-de-sac in La Quinta, as well as an apartment dweller's truck parked blocking her driveway. Brian Harnik,' 45-025 Manitou Drive, Indian Wells, President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Coachella Valley, expressed gratitude to the City Council for implementing the air conditioning installation at the La Ouinta facility. - - ------- ---- ._--- - --- _._- City Council Minutes 13 January 17 i 2006 PRESENTATIONS The Mayor and the City Council presented certificates of achievement to students from La Guinta High School whose art has been displayed in the main lobby of City Hall. The following students were congratulated' and thanked for their contributions to the City's Art Wall. Alyssa Andrade Jose Barrera Alexa Beery Alexandra Bretz Emily Brown Dustin Bryant Emily Carian Eli Carter Ryan Conway Eric Dees Heather Dunlap Mitchell Escarrega Christina Fenn Mallorie Flores Trent Foster Kellie Fox Marissa Garcia Brix Gatti Erica Gonzalez Ashley Kiener Kelley Kilday Matthew Kopsho Brandon Lipe Luz Martinez Carlin McCasland Brittany Murphy Vanessa Ortega Monica Phillips Danielle Powers Rachel Rivera George Rodriguez Charly Roth Alexandria Sanchez Annie Schuler Timothy Takahara Natalie Thornton Maya Trivino Robert Velasquez Gerry Villa Spencer Walsh Alec Wilson Danae York Presley Young Casey Zaparinuk PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 . PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-838, CONDITIONS NOS. 35 AND 40(a), APPELLANT: WASHINGTON 111 , LTD. Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report. Council Member Osborne asked if the City has the right to implement changes when the developer comes back for approval of portions of the Specific Plan after the Specific Plan has been approved. City Council Minutes 14 January 1 7, 2006 Planner Mogensen responded the Specific Plan was approved in two phases, but the developer has been implementing the plan with multiple phases over several years. Director Evans advised the developer is developing the project in a piecemeal fashion, which amounts to multi-phases. He said the City has the right to make adjustments that address the effects of building in increments on the circulation element for the project. City Attorney Jenson stated, with regard to the developers contention that the Specific Plan gives him vested rights, the Specific Plan is a legislative act just like the General Plan. She advised that the City has the right to amend a specific plan. She. said when the developer files a Site Development Permit, which he has not done for the building at this time, and has begun construction, vested rights then come into play. She further clarified that the Council has a Site Development Permit before them and access issues can and should be reviewed by the Planning Commission or the City Council. Since the access road is shown in the original Specific Plan for Phase One, the Council does have the legal right to impose it when it appears access may become a problem. Council Member Osborne asked if a pedestrian study has ever been done on this site as a whole. Director Evans responded it has not been required. Council Member Henderson asked how long a temporary road would take to complete. City Engineer Jonasson said staff is only looking for a sectional drawing and a certain thickness of asphalt on a minimum base, which can be done very quickly and shouldn't hold up the developer. Council Member Henderson commented that she believes the Planning Commission's concern' was for the success of the businesses that will be going into the new building. She said the temporary road appears to be a solution that is of benefit to all parties. Mayor Adolph asked about the condition regarding wheel stops. Director Evans replied the code is designed so bumper stops are not needed but it does not specifically state they are not allowed. Mayor Adolph said he feels curbs are just as much of a tripping hazard as wheel stops. He also feels until the City code is changed to specifically prohibit them, a developer can also interpret the code to allow them. Mayor Adolph mentioned there is a left turn access further south on Washington Street from Simon Drive which allows access to this section of the project. He also feels access can be gained from Caleo Bay and Avenue ~-_._._----- City Council Minutes 15 January 17, 2006 47, via La Guinta Center Drive, by making a left turn behind the Lowe's Hardware Store building. Council Member Henderson said she feels wheel stops create a problem in keeping the parking lots clean since dirt and debris tends to collect behind them. She also asked if the bumper stops are along the curbs only or in the interior of the parking lot. Planner Mogensen replied they are only specified in the application along the curb, not in the parking lot where there will be raised planters. The Mayor asked for the applicant's comments at 7:50 p.m. Jack Tan, the developer, introduced his associate, Bill Sanchez, and stated he contends there still is more than adequate access to and from the project since the opening of Trader Joe's. He said one of the changes that was previously made, was to route interior traffic to remain on-site rather than to exit at Simon Drive. He pointed out ways on the site plan to exit the project and effect a left turn by making right turns and then U-turns on Highway 111 and on Washington Street to allow cars to go south. He addressed the issue of a nexus being created and contended that there are studies prepared to meet the City Traffic Engineer's criteria that do not show a nexus between the new building and the need to provide additional access. He said he discussed two concepts with staff: 1) to install a temporary access and later remove it and; 2) to install the permanent road. He said he drafted an MOU, to cover those suggestions, which was negatively received by the City's Traffic Engineer. He said the MOU language also declared him not to be in default of a bond, which a staff member had mentioned was the case, and he wanted that established. He also asked that the City Council agree that the parking study as submitted and approved is adequate for the rest of the development and no further phasing justifications will be needed for future submittals. Mr. Tarr said the area of disagreement is that the IImacro" project issues were the subject of Specific Plan Amendment No.4, which has been approved and therefore is not subject to further requirements as the multiple phases come forward. He said the staff is asking this street be accelerated rather than putting it on a later project phase. He also read from Amendnlent No. 4 that IIsuch improvements shall occur subject to market conditions." He felt this clearly showed the intent of the amendment was to allow for phasing or sequencing as the market conditions dictated. Mr. Tarr objected to the condition disallowing the use of bunlper stops or wheel stops in front of the new Sub-major 5 and Shops 4 building. Mr. City Council Minutes 16 January 17, 2006 Sanchez pointed out the sidewalk in front of the building is utilizing a special decorative design treatment in the walk itself. In the absence of wheel stops cars hanging over the sidewalk will cover it up. He also stated the other major tenant buildings in the development have wheel stops and this is inconsistent with those approvals. Council Member Henderson asked the City Attorney what constitutes a nexus. City Attorney Jenson said in her view, if the City Council feels it will facilitate better over-all circulation in that area and they wish to encourage traffic flows to utilize La Quinta Center Drive, that establishes a link to the project being considered. Council Member Henderson said she has been troubled by the argument that there is no nexus. She stated the whole project as it is being built out has a nexus one piece to the other. She said she questions the point of asking the Public Works Director to state in an MOU that there is no nexus. Mr. Tarr said he has gone through some traffic studies at the direction of the City so they could have some rules to follow. He differs with the City Attorney's opinion and believes that there isn't a sufficient demonstration of a nexus. Mr. Tarr said the City Engineer agreed with him at one point and so he wants to have that agreement in writing in the form. of an MOU. Council Member Henderson asked when the signal project at Simon Drive is supposed to begin. City Engineer Tim Jonasson replied they have already started on the west side so he expects the traffic signal could be installed within six months. Mr. Tarr said he has spoken against the signal, he doesn't see it as a benefit to his project, and believes there are no warrants to justify it. He said staff has indicated they wish to keep the signal on a very short east/west cycle so there isn't a serious traffic back-up to Washington and none of that was borne out by his traffic studies. Council Member Henderson said she is able to support Mr. Tarr's request with regard to the wheel stops but she feels the community will benefit by placing the temporary road along the back of the project. Mayor Adolph asked if the City Engineer has stated he will support a temporary road with the understanding a permanent road will be constructed to code later. City Engineer Jonasson stated that was correct. Mayor Adolph said he feels since Mr. Tarr has said he would agree to install the temporary road this needs to get off dead center and go forward. -_.- - - _._._-_.~._----_.__.._- ------ -------- ~_._.- --- ---- ---- -- ._- - City Council Minutes 17 January 17, 2006 Mr. Tarr said he wanted it in an MOU so that he has something in writing to show this is being done by him as a IIgood will" gesture. Mayor Adolph responded the Specific Plan shows the road there and it's been approved to be there. Community Development Director Evans clarified staff's position is, only two conditions of approval are before the City Council to rule on, and an MOU is not necessary to accomplish them. City Attorney Jenson, in response to Council Member Henderson stated she has seen the MOU, and in her brief review she is convinced the City Council should not enter into this document. She explained, not only does it seek to establish that there is no nexus to justify the condition but it also seeks to gain agreement from the City that in the future there will be no further changes in conditions of the Specific Plan. She said for reasons of safety the City should never agree to bargain away its rights. There being no further requests to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:19 p.m. Public Works Director/City Engineer Jonasson asked to clarify several things about the meeting Mr. Tarr has alluded to during the Public Hearing. He said his reason for meeting with Mr. Tarr was to clarify some outstanding drainage issues that were on the site where the road was to cross. He said he was attempting to facilitate those concerns and the nexus of the driveway to the building was a side issue. He also explained that while the plans orïginally did not call for a traffic signal at Simon Drive, a traffic study became essential when it was determined the need existed to install traffic control there. The Traffic Engineer felt improving on site traffic within the development would be key to preventing a backup on Washington. Mayor Adolph asked if the drainage problems on site will have to be looked at again. Director Jonasson said they have been working with the developer and have gone to other sites such as Cabazon to look at underground retention solutions. He said while confident it can be solved, he doesn't believe the hydrology of the site has been entirely worked out. He explained some of the future sites shown will still need to have additional work. Council Member Osborne asked if there are bumper stops on the Trader Joe's property. Director Doug Evans responded that there are wheel stops on that property. City Council Minutes 18 January 17, 2006 Council Member Osborne asked if there is a concern about a bond on this property. Director Jonasson said he has no knowledge of any problems and doesn't know what that was in reference to. Council Member Osborne said he sees a direct nexus to the road and the building, he said he doesn't feel as strongly about the wheel stops since some do appear on the property and he can appreciate the decorative treatment of the walkways in front of the building so he can support the appeal to that condition. Council Member Sniff said he doesn't really care for wheel stops but he would suggest they be allowed and the Council should insist the roadway be built. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Sniff to uphold the Planning Commission decision regarding the installation of a temporary or permanent road and to deny the condition prohibiting the installation of wheel stops. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. 2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSALS, REPROGRAMMING FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FOR FY 2006-2007. The staff report which was presented by Principal Planner Fred Baker. Council Member Osborne questioned the staff's recommendation to fund the Boys and Girls Club in the amount of $30,000 and asked if this has been budgeted this way. City Manager Genovese responded the $30,000 is a matching amount for $30,000 that the City has budgeted for the Boys and Girls Club for a number of years. Principal Planner Baker clarified that $30,000 is the maximum allowable dollar amount for public service activities. Mayor Pro Tern Sniff, stated he feels the Council should approve this recommendation and at a future meeting look at an additional contribution to the Red Cross. Mayor Adolph declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 8:37 p.m. - -- -~ - --- -_._--~ City Council Minutes 19 January 17, 2006 Scott Kiner, 73101 Highway 111, Palm Desert, Chairperson for the American Red Cross of Riverside County, spoke in favor of the American Red Cross request for $5,000 for the Disaster Relief Program. He said the Riverside County Chapter ranks number two in the state, in both number of volunteers and preparedness. Stu Bailey, 51 889 A venida Montezuma, asked the Council to consider funding to the Red Cross and spoke about the aid that is given to children who are victims of fires. He said in the past year the chapter has helped 1 90 children, 1 7 of which were victims of home fires in single family homes in La Guinta. He outlined the types of aid they provide in the form of vouchers for lodging, food, clothing and other essentials. Jan Hawkins, Director of Development for the Boys and Girls Club, 75275 Purple Hills Road, Indian Wells, thanked the City on behalf of the club for their long-standing support, providing programs for the over 1,300 members of the La Guinta Club. She said the donation of the $30,000 will provide funding for 11 5 children to be members of the Boys and Girls Club who could not otherwise afford to attend the after-school programs. There being no further requests to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:47 p.m. MOTION: It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2006-009 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING PROPOSALS, REPROGRAMMING FUNDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BL.OCK GRANT FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 The motion was unanimously carried with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. Mayor Pro Tern Sniff further requested that the City Manager make a determination regarding adding an item to the agenda as proposed last fall dealing with an additional allocation to the American Red Cross. RECESS: The Mayor declared a short recess at 8:49 pm. The meeting was reconvened at 8:57 p.m. City Council Minutes 20 January 17, 2006 REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Animal Campus Commission. - Council Member Henderson reported the ,new Animal Campus is open to accept animals and the will be holding the Grand Opening on February 9, 2006. CV AG Transportation and Public Safety Committee - Council Member Henderson reported the Public Safety Committee had a report from the Riverside County Public Health Service on preparing for a pandemic influenza threat. The rest of the agenda was for briefings and the fire threat updates. CVCC - Mayor Pro Tern Sniff reported the Commission met and chose Richard Kite of the City of Rancho Mirage as the Chair and Hank Hohenstein of Desert Hot Springs was named Vice-Chair. Initially the meeting schedule is to precede the Environment and Energy Committee at 12 :00 noon and the next meeting will be Feb. 9, 2006. They also set up several committees including a Finance Committee. Council Member Henderson asked that the CVCC minutes be distributed to the Council when they are ready. CV AG Environment and Energy Committee - The major discussion item was the CVMSHCP and he took the position to move it forward to the Executive Committee and Technical Advisory Committee but reserved the right to vote "No" at a later date because of continuing questions and concerns. Technical Advisory Committee - City Manager Genovese reported the T AC voted unanimously to continue the matter of the CVMSHCP for 30 days. C.V. Mountains Conservancy - Mayor Pro Tern Sniff reported staff was directed to return at the next meeting to provide the financial position for determination if further land acquisition should take place in the near future. League of California Cities - Council Member Henderson said she attended a Revenue and Taxation policy meeting in Sacramento last week and the major issue discussed was the streamlining of sales and use taxes. They received updates on the Housing and General Plan Task Force and the infrastructure update as well as a presentation on Prop. 72. Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitor's Authority - Council Member Henderson stated tomorrow will be the first meeting of the year. Mayor Pro Tern Sniff requested the minutes of the CV A. ---.-._-------- --_.-------- ~- . - ---- -'---- - - - -_._-- --- - ------- -- - City Council Minutes 21 January 17, 2006 Palm Springs International Airport Commission - Council Member Henderson asked if the City's representative Nancy Doria was contacted about continuing to serve and if a report was going to be given. City Manager Genovese said staff has contacted Ms. Doria by letter and requested she give an annual report. Riverside County Transportation Commission - Council Member Henderson said there is a meeting on Thursday. Council Member Osborne asked about the IIDesign Build" issue, and if that will somehow take funds away from the area. Council Member Henderson said the Governor wants to allocate $285 million back for the Riverside County area but he wants it to be used for a IIshelf-ready" project. * * * * * * * * * * * * * All other reports and/or minutes were noted and filed. DEPARTMENT REPORTS 1 . CITY MANAGER A. RESPONSE(S) TO PUBLIC COMMENTS B. REPORT ON ACTION REGARDING THE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS PERTAINING TO AN EMERGENCY CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SilverRock RESORT MOUNTAIN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. C. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP - City Manager Genovese reported he had included an agenda for the February 18th workshop in the Agenda Packet. He responded to Council Member Osborne that it has been advertised in the Gem and there will be several press releases closer to the meeting. City Attorney Jenson asked if the Council would like to have Legal Counsel present. Council concurred it wasn't necessary. 2. CITY ATTORNEY - City Attorney Kathy Jenson reported legal staff is looking into the new animal control legislation and will make a report in the future. 3. CITY CLERK A. REPORT ON UPCOMING EVENTS 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2005 _ Council Member Henderson asked that the minutes reflect the record numbers this year of $376,359,452 in Total Valuation for the year and 5,587 building permits issued. 5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2005 6. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2005 7. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT - NONE 8. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2005 9. POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2005 10. FIRE CHIEF'S QUARTERLY REPORT - NONE City Council Minutes 22 January 1 7, 2006 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS Mayor Pro Tern Sniff expressed his concern about the action taken by the Planning Commission regarding Hookah Parlors and asked that it be placed on the February 7, 2006 agenda for review and discussion and possible action by the City Council. Mayor Adolph stated he also had that on his list of items to discuss. City Attorney Jenson advised it requires a majority vote to call a matter up. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Sniff/Mayor Adolph to call up for review, discussion and action at the meeting of February 7, 2006. Council Member Osborne discussed his reservations and asked if a specific location in the City was under consideration for this use. Community Development Director Evans said there is a proponent who has indicated an interest but not in a site specific location. He advised if the Planning Commission recommendation were to stand; it would require filing a Conditional Use Permit. Council Member Henderson stated she would never encourage anyone to smoke, but there is a question whether a use can be legally denied when it hasn't been declared illegal. She questioned the "no smoking in the workplace law" and if the proponent didn't have employees could he get around that law. Community Development Director Evans responded there are three exemptions to the law and the applicant feels he can meet one of the three pursuant to the state law. Mayor Adolph asked how these Hookah establishments are monitored. Director . Evans replied they are supposed to be open rooms that the proprietor can visually monitor. He relayed he has. observed one such establishment where a hookah· pipe was being used outside on the sidewalk. Mayor Pro Tern Sniff urged that this be brought up for discussion, since cigarette smoke is known to be a leading cause in a large number of annual deaths and he feels the Council should do all they can do to discourage smoking. ACTION: The motion failed with Council Members Henderson and Osborne voting NO. Mayor Adolph stated he wished to make it very clear that he has notified the Desert Sun on at least three occasions that he is not in favor of holding an election to fill a vacancy should Council Member Perkins not be able to continue to serve on the City Council. He said he hopes they will not continue to print he is in favor of that course of action. -- _._._-_._._.~._....._._- -....----- -- ----- -- -...--__ ___ __ __u___ _ ___ _ City Council Minutes 23 January 17, 2006 Mayor Adolph commented on the article in a recent issue of the Press Enterprise dealing with the designer Arnold Palmer. He noted Mr. Palmer played with several young students at the new PGA course. He felt he had been misled when he made a similar recommendation for the grand opening of SilverRock and someone Informed the Council that it was a policy of Mr. Palmer not to play rounds with members of the public. Mayor Adolph also discussed an invitation he had received to join a meeting of the Cove Association and he toured the Cove with members of the association. He stated he was given a brochure which he provided the Council Members with a copy. He said there are 1,900 violations in the Cove that are in process of code enforcement. He suggested the City needs to do whatever is necessary to make the enforcement in this area effective and prompt. He said he feels perhaps additional staff is needed. Council Member Henderson suggested a staff report be given to the Council to address this situation. 1. STUDY SESSION (Continued) Community Development Director Evans, in response to Mayor Adolph, stated the Study Session was recessed at the point of Council questions and answers. Council Member Henderson asked City Manager Genovese what his impression was of the action taken by T AC regarding their action to continue the CVMSHCP for 30 days. Response: Mr. Genovese stated all of the member cities expressed various levels of concern with areas of the plan. The Cities of Indio and Desert Hot Springs were most vocal in their opposition at that meeting. He said the County of Riverside did vote in favor of moving the Plan forward. Council Member Henderson posed the following questions: . If any of the nine cities do not vote to participate in the Plan can it still go forward. Response: Jim Sullivan replied in that case the EI R would have to be re-circulated. . What is La Guinta's key issue for not supporting the Plan, other than Section 5. Response: - Director Evans _ - Section 5 is the major concern but there are still many technicalities which the City is still identifying. He outlined what he sees as the key components of the decision as 1) does the City support a habitat conservation plan for the valley, 2) what are the ramifications to the City and 3) is La Guinta comfortable with the fee and the fee program. City Council Minutes 24 January 17, 2006 Mayor Adolph posed the following questions: · What is the current status of the Eagle Mountain project's EI R problems. Response: Director Evans replied this is still in the court system and since they intend to enter an appeal this will be the status for several years if not longer. · Who will be the ultimate governing body. Response: Director Evans responded the Conservation Commission (CVCC), the land use authority in the City of La Ouinta will be the La Ouinta City Council subject to having to comply with the Plan criteria. · Where will all of the fee money go. Response: Director Evans said the actual fee money (developers fee) has to go to land acquisition. A range of additional funding sources, touched on earlier, go for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the facilities. He says the CVCC controls the money. · Who is on the CVCC. Response: There are 16 different entities, the County, the Cities, CVWD. · Each with an equal vote. Response: Director Evans - Each has an equal vote except one entity which has more votes than the others _ the County. Response: Mr. Sullivan replied it is actually 1 2 member jurisdictions with 1 6 votes. In terms of assessments each jurisdiction has %. of a vote with the County having 1 vote, so it would require 9 votes for an assessment to pass. · Is it safe to say Section 5 is the City's major problem at this time? Response: Director Evans said concerns are still surfacing one of which came to his attention today from the City Attorney, that concerns decibel levels adjacent to conservation areas. It might be likely a piece of grading equipment couldn't be operated near a conservation area. City Attorney Kathy Jenson interjected that hopefully the City will be able to have a meeting and go over some of these recent concerns and get not only clarification but written documentation of the City's interpretation so years from now it doesn't become a problem. She pointed out that the Plan doesn't deal just with the conservation areas. but has specific restrictions to properties that immediately adjoin a conservation area such as SilverRock Resort. One such is "if property generates noise adjacent to a conservation area exceeding 105 decibels hourly it shall include setbacks, berms and walls ---.---. .-- City Council Minutes 25 January 17, 2006 to minimize noise on the conservation resource. She pointed out that when Mr. Haebert spoke earlier he said it exempted SilverRock but she would like to have written confirmation for the City based on its future plans for that property., . Mayor Adolph asked who is going to enforce all the rules. Response: Community Development Director Evans said it will be a combination of the cities, the CVCC will do some, various law enforcement agencies, California Department of Fish and Game, BLM and perhaps Fish and Wildlife. City Attorney Jenson added that by entering into the contract the City Council will agree to participate in the enforcement. The CVCC will also have some enforcement responsibility through the HANS process. . Mayor Adolph asked if the Riverside County Sheriff's Department firing range up above Lake Cahuilla will be affected by the noise restrictions in the Plan. Response: Jim Sullivan said existing uses will not be affected by the noise restrictions. He said such uses that exist in the conservation area such as mines that are operating will not be affected. City Attorney Jenson asked about the provIsions for eXisting uses that require modifications such as plantings. She said there are also plants spelled out which are existing that will be required to be modified and/or removed such as Oleander. Katie Barrows, 73711 Fred Waring Drive, said her understanding of the noise is they would be looking at a facility that would generate noise on an on- going basis. Construction noise would not be considered in that same vein. She said with regard to landscaping there are guidelines for plantings which restrict poisonous plants such as Oleander which is poisonous to the Peninsular Big Horn Sheep. Community Development Director Evans said the City will need to be specifically involved in landscaping plans for properties adjacent to the conservation areas including approval of plant materials. Brian Harnick, 45-025 Manitou Drive, Indian Wells, stated he represents a client who has property in Desert Hot Springs who will be heavily impacted by this plan and he wanted to have that understood upfront. He commented this plan will affect everyone in the Coach ell a Valley and the City Managers on the T AC have been looking at this very seriously but his concern is there is pressure being placed on them to a rush to judgment on this Plan. He said City Council Minutes 26 January 17, 2006 his message to all of the cities is "slow down" and work together with all the other cities. Council Member Sniff said his main concerns are that this plan has too many ramifications for the cities and that it can subordinate them to the CVCC. He mentioned the CVCC has the power to assess the members for substantial amounts of money. He said there are two funds involved; one for the immediate acquisition of land as well as one for long-term investments to be used for maintenance and operations. His concern was that some of the voting members might be quite vulnerable to large assessments of this kind and yet be out-voted by those more financially sound. · Council Member Sniff stated he would like to have a City Attorney's opinion regarding the potential for the City to be sued by entities in opposition if it takes an action to approve the Plan. Response: City Attorney Jenson said one of the things that CV AG is doing is notifying all of the property owners involved in the. areas to give them an opportunity to speak with CV AG before they hear about it for the first time, when the cities take action on the plan. She said she thinks the Community Development Director has made an excellent suggestion in his presentation that there be a 30-day period for challenges to be filed after the CV AG action to adopt a Notice of Determination. · Council Member Sniff asked how this Plan will affect Imperial Irrigation District and the Coachella Valley Water District. Response: Jim Sullivan responded it is not defined because their land holdings aren't identified. Council Member Sniff suggested the City Attorney and the Community Development Director put together some of the salient points, detailing the . concerns of the City of La Quinta, to present to CV AG. Mayor Adolph asked if 30 days is adequate to work out the concerns discussed. Community Development Director Evans said at this point there are a lot of concerns that have been itemized over a fairly long period of time but have not been addressed. Council Member Henderson asked if the City continues this for 30 days as T AC did, what is the time frame for the Cities to approve, would it be in the area of 60 to 90 days. Jim Sullivan responded Yes. Council Member Henderson said she has one further concern regarding the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Water Resources Map that is not a part of the plan _._~- --"'-'---'--~"---' - - ---- --------------- -- -- ~ \- ~ ',\ '" City Council Minutes 27 January 17, 2006 and is going to be subject and available for changes through the CVCC, she feels it should be a very strict criteria that the map should be designated so every change made to it must be sent to each agency with the new designation on it, perhaps even certified, so that everyone is using the same map at the same time. Community Development Director Doug Evans commented if the Plan is approved and the EIR is certified on February 6, 2006, that is the final Plan and when it comes to the Executive Committee they have the ability to approve it or not approve it and if they don't approve it they have the ability to present a list of changes they want to see to the Plan. If that doesn't happen and the Plan is approved, the opportunities for changes will no longer be available unless or until one of the member cities, other than Palm Springs, votes not to approve the Plan. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved by Council Members Sniff/Osborne to adjourn at 10:27 p.m. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Perkins ABSENT. Respectfully submitted, '~~lL ~.-t-¿ L~Lll -l Dr- JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Guinta, California