Loading...
1995 04 18 CC Minutes2 LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April18, 1995 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on April 18, 1995 was called to order at the hour of 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Pena, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena ABSENT: None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, recommended adding as Business Item No.8, the consideration of an additional donation from KSL Recreation for passes to the Legends of Golf Tournament. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Bangerter/Sniff to add as Business Item No.8, an additional donation from KSL Recreation for various passes to the Liberty Mutual Legends of Golf Tournament as the need to take action arose after the agenda was posted. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of April 4, 1995 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS None PRESENTATIONS None PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, didn't believe that the recent use of the La Quinta Sculpture Park for filming a TV sports event was an appropriate use of one of the City's cultural enrichment centers. Re also questioned the allowance of a free-standing, 1 story, garage at 79-720 Iris Court in the Cactus Flower development which he felt was an affront to the neighborhood. Re said that the City is responsible for establishing, maintaining, and enforcing community standards and he believed that those standards were violated by allowing an inappropriate use 6of the Sculpture Park and construction of the oversize garage. He encouraged the City to enforce the standards that have been Set. Mayor Pena requested staff to investigate both matters and report back to Council. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 2 April 18, 1995 Mr. Ed Kibbey, 78-620 Sanita Drive, spoke to the Council regarding the Landscape and Lighting District. He asked the Council to combine the Special District Assessments with the City-wide Assessment because he felt that the administrative cost in separating them isn't cost- effective. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE 1. LETTER FROM PEARL HARBOR SURVIVORS ASSOCIATION REQUESTING CONTRIBUTION TOWARD A DOCUMENTARY FILM. Mr. Ken Landis, 78-020 Calle Norte, a Pearl Harbor survivor, requested the Council to consider a contribution to the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association to help fund the production of a documentary film about the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He advised that they have been visiting the valley's high schools to relate the history of Pearl Harbor to students, but won't be able to continue that program much longer because of their age. The?therefore, they wish to produce a documentary film for future educational purposes. Copies of the film will be provided to the high schools upon completion. Mayor Pena advised that staff will contact the association regarding their request to be placed on a future Council agenda. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING FRONT-YARD FENCING FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE RANCHO OCOTILLO SUBDIVISION ON THE SOUTh SIDE OF IRED WARING DRIVE, EAST OF ADAMS STREET. APPLICANT: CENTURY HOMES DENNIS CUNNINGHAM.. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that design guidelines for developers proposing to complete unfinished subdivisions are included in the City's Compatibility Ordinance adopted in March, 1994. In July, 1994, the Planning Commission approved Century Homes' application to develop homes in the unfinished Rancho Ocotillo subdivision, based on provisions of the Compatibility Ordinance. A letter from the applicant was made a part of that record of approval which stated that the new homes would match existing homes with garden privacy walls on front and corner elevations. On February 14, 1995, the Planning Commission reviewed fencing installed by Century Homes as it relates to Condition Nos. 14 and 17 of the Conditions of Approval of the project and found the fencing and gates were not compatible. After the Planning Commission reaffirmed their decision on February 28th, the applicant filed an BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 3 April 18, 1995 appeal to the Council. He advised that some of the wrought-iron, pedestrian gates installed at the original homes in the tract have been modified by homeowners with various types of panelling, but no RV gates were installed because of the limited access to rear yards. He advised that RV access was not discussed during the Century Homes project review in 1994. He recommended that the Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision based upon the Compatibility Ordinance. He distributed photos of some of the wrought-iron gates. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that the minimum sideyard setback in the development is 5 feet, but the new homes range from 10 to 14 feet because they are smaller in size than the originally-constructed homes. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Herman advised that items stored behind the walls must be screened from street visibility. He believed that the development's CC&R's limit RV storage, but would be enforced by the Homeowners Association HOA). Mayor Pena asked who enforces the CC&R's in the absence of a HOA. Mr. Herman advised that in the absence of a HOA, individual homeowners enforce CC&R's through civil court. Ms. Barbara frwin, 44-065 Camino La Cresta, said that she and her neighbors were present to support the Planning Commission's decision. She was opposed to the privacy panels that Century Homes substituted for block walls and pedestrian gates and felt that it's imperative that developers live up to the conditions set forth in their project approval. She urged the Council to deny the appeal. Mr. Don Bolleg, 44-095 Camino La Vanda, advised that he purchased his Rancho Ocotillo home just two weeks ago and it has a 12-foot wide sideyard with two swinging gates and a curb-cut that extends to his north property line. This led him to believe that he had vehicle access to his backyard and was substantiated by the. CC&R's which state that vehicles parked within the lot must be screened from the street. He said that backyard access was a major consideration when he decided to purchase that particular lot and questioned why the City would allow the curb-cut and gate installation and then preclude him from having backyard access. Council Member Cathcart believed that the curb-cuts were not to accommodate RV access, but were installed by the original developer and prior to new construction. Mayor Pena asked how many homes were affected in the new phase. Mr. Dennis Cuninngham, 45-420 Desert Fox, Director of Projects for Century Homes, advised that 83 lots in Rancho Ocotillo were purchased by Century Homes with 15 BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 4 April 18, 1995 homes completed and seven more under construction. Re advised that they adopted the development's CC&R's which require that parking of miscellaneous equipment, trucks, RY's, etc. on any lot, must not be visible from the street on which the lot fronts. He advised that the decision to construct the gates in the manner that they exist was decided through interpretation of the conditions of approval and the CC&R's. Re referred to terminology such as to match" or similar to existing" used in Condition Nos. 14, 16, and 24, but believed that some flexibility would be allowed in the gate construction since such references were not included in Condition No.17. Re distributed photographs of fencing on both existing and new homes which he felt showed compatibility in the gate design. He felt that the main issue was visual impact on the street and offered to construct perforated, non-see-through, sheet-metal screening on the gates. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cunningham advised that they didn't contact staff before moving ahead with the gates because he felt that they were complying with Condition No.17 after driving through the tract and looking at what was there. Council Member Perkins didn't think that driving around and looking at different gates was the proper way to proceed. He was concerned that in looking at pictures of the. gates, they are different than what was originally established for that development. It appears that he has used the word pedestrian gate to create a car gate which has led people to believe that they are allowed to park vehicles in the sideyard. Re felt that Mr. Cunningham was taking liberties and reading into the CC&R's what he wants, as opposed to what the City wants. Re believed that the City's requirements have not been complied with and saw no reason to issue a Certificate of Occupancy until they are complied with. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cunningham advised that front-facing gates aren't addressed by the CC&R's. Council Member Cathcart asked staff what standards a homeowner would have to comply with if he/she should want to convert a block wall to gates. Mr. Herman advised that the compatibility ordinance only applies to new construction. Homeowners may modify the gate later as long as it's structurally sound. Council Member Cathcart felt that the developer used wrought-iron gates facing the street in some areas where it obviously should be a block wall. Mayor Pena questioned the different colored screen panels used on existing gates and asked if that modification was covered under the CC&R's and Mr. Herman advised that it wasn't. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, commented that a motorhome can't be screened from the street unless it's behind a 24-foot high gate and it would still visually BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 5 April 18, 1995 impact the neighbor next door. He felt that the developer had failed to follow the rules and should get back on track. Council Member Bangerter felt that Century Homes had failed to comply with the conditions and would not support the appeal. Council Member Sniff stated that there are variations in the gates of existing homes which may have led the developer to believe that modifications would be accepted, but he felt that the original design was better than the modifications. He felt that the appeal should be denied and that the City should maximize compatibility and consistency within the development. Mayor Pena advised that conditions are sometimes interpreted differently from its intended meaning and may cause a developer to believe that his/her actions are correct. He felt that the wider sideyard gates and curb-cuts are confusing and therefore, imply to homebuyers that RV's can be parked in the sideyard. Re questioned the possibility of a compromise on the existing 15 homes and enforce the conditions on the balance of the project. Council Member Perkins felt that developers are responsible for coming to the City for confirmation of conditions and should not interpret the rules themselves. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that the streets are dedicated streets and the CC&R's regulate the use of the homes and property. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that developers and homeowners must both comply with the CC&R's and City Codes, but if there is a variance between the two, it is the most restrictive one that they must comply with. Mayor Pena asked how pedestrian gates are defined by?the City. Mr. Herman advised that the Planning Commission has defined a pedestrian gate as being 3'A feet wide, but the City doesn't have a written standard. Council Member Sniff asked when the curb-cuts were installed and for what purpose. Mr. Cunningham advised that the curb-cuts were constructed by Williams Development at the onset of the original project. He said that some of them are offset from the driveway because the housing plan was flipped" in the opposite direction. Council Member Cathcart advised that some of the curb-cuts exist on the side where there is no driveway or backyard access at all. Council Member Sniff asked if a wrought-iron gate precludes it from having a panel. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 6 Aprii 18, 1995 Mr. Herman advised that the intent was to require construction to be completed in a compatible manner, but homeowners can modify with panelling after taking ownership. Council Member Cathcart advised that the developer is required to construct the homes with block walls and pedestrian gates to be compatible with the original homes, but the homeowners can remove the block wall and replace with wrought-iron gates that allow RV access to the sideyard. Mayor Pena didn't feel that it made sense to go back and enforce the conditions on what already exists. Council Member Cathcart agreed that it didn't make sense from a realistic standpoint, but it did in regard to the appeal. Council Member Sniff pointed out that not all homeowners will want to modify their gates. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Herman advised that 61 lots remain undeveloped out of. the original 83. Council Member Perkins suggested that any compromise should apply only to homes already sold. Council Member Bangerter commented that denial of the appeal would require the developer to replace existing wrought-iron gates with block walls. She asked if a provision could be made for homeowners who have closed escrow and wish to retain their existing gates without having to reconstruct them. Ms. Honeywell pointed out that the direction given by the Community Development Director to the developer was to remove all non-conforming existing fencing before a Certificate of Occupancy would be issued for the new single-family home. That direction could be interpreted to mean that only those properties which have not received such certificates are required to be modified. She advised that the developer could offer to modify gates on properties already issued a Certificate of Occupancy, but would have difficulty doing it without the homeowner's consent. Mr. Cunningham advised that most of the 15 completed homes have closed escrow. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to deny the appeal requested by Century Homes to install front-yard fencing, i.e., RV access gates, that is different from the existing Phase I) homes on dwellings that have not yet received a Certificate of Occupancy and uphold the Planning Commission decision as evidenced by a letter dated February 17, 1995 from the Community Development Director. Motion carried with Council Member Perkins voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-73. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 7 April 18, 1995 2. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL CURRENT BIDS FOR THE PALM ROYALE PARK PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE COMBINED FRITZ BURNSIPALM ROYALE PARK PROJECT. Mayor Pena abstained from the issue due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that staff recommends rejection of all bids on the Palm Royale Project because favorable bids were not received. Because of the size of the project, there were only four bidders and none of them were particularly park construction-type contractors. He recommended that the project be combined with the Fritz Burns Park project to gain better bid prices. He advised that staff directed the consultant to redesign the Fritz Burns Park project as directed by Council on February 21st, making the following four changes: 1) cover the aquatic area with grass only; 2) reduce the size of the south parking lot with a bid alternate to expand the parking lot should the pool construction begin midway through the park construction); 3) extend minimal conduit for the pool and recreation facilities, and: 4) as a second bid alternate, extend the improvements on Avenue 52 eastward and construct a portion of the north parking lot. He advised that staff needs approximately two weeks to combine the specifications of the two projects and estimated a bid-opening date of June 5th with construction beginning July 1st. He said that the Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed staff's proposal on April 10th and recommended approval. He then reviewed staff's recommendations as contained in the staff report. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, expressed concern about the continuing delays of the Palm Royale Park construction, but could see the merits of combining the two projects. He referred to the list of bid alternates on the Palm Royale Park project and asked if they would be included. He also questioned the benefit of combining the two projects if the savings only amounted to $5,000 as stated on Attachment 3 of the staff report. Mr. Cosper advised that the bid alternates were not included in the $182,000 projected estimated cost, but were included as bid alternates to find out their cost for possible consideration. He advised that the low bid on the Palm Royale Park project was $332,000 which included the bid alternates. He said that staff expects to receive bids on the combined projects that will bring Palm Royale Park in at the engineer's estimate of $182,000, thus increasing the net savings upward to $50,000. Mr. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, said he was still opposed to constructing the Fritz Burns Park without the pool. He advised that there is a large constituency who want a pool and a group of citizens have begun an initiative drive to place the matter on the ballot. Re suggested that the Council give the citizens an opportunity to discuss the matter with them at an informal meeting. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 8 April 18, 1995 Council Member Sniff advised that he is willing to discuss the pool with the people at any reasonable time, but noted that the Council is divided on the issue. However, he felt that it's important to move forward with the park construction. Council Member Cathcart was concerned about delaying the Palm Royale Park construction and asked if it could be moved ahead of the Fritz Burns Park once construction begins. Mr. Cosper advised that he expects the parks to be constructed concurrently within a 90- day construction period. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that construction is expected to begin July 1st and completed at the end of September. Council Member Cathcart advised that he has met with Mr. Wolff to discuss the pool issue and continues to be available to anyone who wishes to meet with him on that issue. Council Member Perkins advised that he, too, is available to meet with anyone or any group to discuss the pool issue. He advised that he currently opposes the pool, but will listen to its proponents with an open mind. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter didn't believe that Mr. Wolff meant to imply that individual Council Members won't meet with residents on the issue, but rather suggesting that an informal study session would provide an opportunity for the Council to discuss the issue openly with them. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to 1) approve authorization for staff to reject all current bids for the Palm Royale Park; 2) authorize staff to combine projects, Fritz Burns Community Park with Palm Royale Park, and; 3) authorize staff to advertise and receive bids for the construction of the combined project, Fritz Burns Community Park/Palm Royale Park." Motion carried with Mayor Petia ABSENT. MINUTh ORDER NO.95-74. 3. CONSWERATION OF APPROVAL OF SUMMER RECREATION PROGRAMS. Mr. Hartung. Building & Safety Director, advised that staff met with the YMCA and Coachella Valley Parks & Recreation District regarding an aquatics program at the La Quinta High School this summer and are confident that such a program will be included with the City's summer recreation program.. He asked Council to approve the publishing of a Summer Recreation Program brochure at a cost of approximately $4,000 which will be funded from the Recreation Director's salary. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 9 April 18,1995 Council Member Cathcart asked if the aquatics program would be included in the brochure. Mr. Hartung advised that it would, as staff expects to have confirmation on the aquatics program within seven to ten days. In response to Mayor Pena, Ms. Francisco, Recreation Supervisor, advised that the proposed programs are repeat programs from last summer that were successful. She advised that possibly half of the brochure printing costs would be recovered through the revenue received from the classes, noting that the instructors receive a percentage of the registration. Council Member Perkins was pleased that the City is going to try an aquatics program, realizing that it's not what everyone wants, but it's a start in the right direction. Council Member Sniff felt it would provide valuable information. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter expressed appreciation to the recreation staff for their hard work. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the proposed Summer Recreation Program. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-75. 4. CONSWERATION OF APPROVAL OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BET'WEEN THE COUNTY OF R[VERSIDE AND THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. Mr. Hartung, Building & Safety Director, advised that an additional police officer will be hired in July and approval of the Fourth Amendment to the law enforcement services agreement is necessary to begin the recruitment process. In response to Council Member Perkins, Captain Dye, of the Sheriff's Office, advised that he was satisfied with the level of service that the additional officer will provide the City. Mr. Robert Tyler. 44-215 Villeta Drive, asked if the addition was to the day shift or swing shift to which Mr. Hartung responded that it would be the day shift. Mr. Tyler questioned why only one officer was being added. Captain Dye advised that a thorough analysis revealed a need for additional police services on the day shift with some overlap into the swing shift. In addition to the eight BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 10 April 18.1995 hours added to the contract there is available funding for targeting specific times and problems with part-time officers, as done with the Citizens on Patrol group. Mr. Tyler said that response times are sometimes half an hour and he felt that the addition of one officer was woefully inadequate. Mayor Pena advised that the average emergency response time is seven minutes. Mr. Tyler questioned how the sheriff's office is able to determine if the sounding of an alarm is an emergency or not. Captain Dye advised that alarms are not given high priority because over 99% are false alarms. Council Member Perkins advised that the Council will review the level of service on a constant basis and will add manpower as needed. Re would prefer to add more officers, but wasn't convinced that it's necessary at the present time. Re will continue to watch the need closely. Mr. Jack Sobelman, 52-815 Avenida Martinez, requested that written reports be provided regarding the various calls for response to the sheriff's office. Re also asked if the City pays booking fees and if there is any way in which to recover those fees. Mayor Pefla advised that the City is required to pay booking fees and recovers them whenever possible. He added that the Council does receive reports from the Sheriff's Office on their response activities. Captain Dye advised that response reports and records are available for the public's review. Ms. Joyce SivIey, 79-775 Westward Ho Drive, felt that a 30-minute response time was * too long because burglars know that they have that much time and someone could be hurt. She felt that more officers and shorter response times are needed. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Fourth Amendment to the agreement for law enforcement services between the County of Riverside and the City of La Quinta. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-76. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 11 April 18, 1995 5. TRANSMITTAL OF AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1994 FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE LA QUINTA FINANCING AUTHORITY. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to receive and file the Audited Financial Statements for the year ending June 30, 1994. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-77. 6. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE DESERT HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL COMMITTEE. Council Member Perkins said he would like to say that he had mixed emotions on the contribution request, but advised that he didn't. He felt very strongly that City funds should be allocated to the living and not a memorial to the dead. He advised that he makes contributions to such organizations as the Police Officer's Foundation and Red Cross as opposed to contributing to memorials for slain police officers because he wants to help the living, even though members of his family are police officers. Re felt that the holocaust should not be forgotten and should be taught in the schools, but memorials should be supported by the private sector. He advised that he would oppose the contribution. Council Member Bangerter appreciated Council Member Perkins' comments, but felt that the City should be a part of the educational process. Council Member Cathcart supported the contribution because he felt that it's important for the living to remember important events in history such as this. Council Member Sniff commented that some of those involved in the holocaust are still alive and are trying to remind people today of the atrocities that took place in the past. He felt that history is a benchmark to measure mankind and should be kept alive so that children will learn the value of it. He believed that such memorials provide a re- enforcement to history and something tangible to help mankind to learn from. He felt that it's important to support the living with the knowledge of history, both pleasant and unpleasant. He believed that the memorial has educational value and supported the contribution. Mayor Pena noted that the City supports many good causes in the community and felt that the City should support this memorial as well. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to approve the request for financial contribution to the Desert Holocaust Memorial Committee in the amount of $1,000 to be funded from the legislative Special Projects Contingency Account. Motion carried with Council Member Perkins voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-78. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 12 April 18 995 7. REVIEW OF COUNCIL'S RULES OF PROCEDURE AND COMPARISON TO ROBERTS' RULES OF ORDER; CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING SAID RULES OF PROCEDURE. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that Council directed her to prepare this report for the purpose of comparing the Council's Rules of Procedure with Roberts' Rules of Order to find existing discrepancies and make recommendations for changes. She pointed out some of the discrepancies and recommendations contained in the report such as deleting special references to study sessions since the Brown Act now requires the same notifications and public participation requirements as for any other item. She advised that some portions of Roberts' Rules of Order aren't as specific to the City's needs as are the Council's Rules of Procedures and those areas were left unchanged. She referred to Section 7.2 regarding failure to vote and suggested the following reading for that section: Every Council Member should vote unless disqualified for cause. A Council Member who abstains due to reasons of conflict shall for purposes of the item under consideration, be considered as if absent. A Council Member abstaining for reasons other than conflict shall be counted as present for purposes of a quorum and in case of a tie-vote, such abstentions are counted in favor of the motion." Council Member Perkins felt that the report was excellent. He questioned the wording in Section 4.11 regarding the final ruling of the Chair and asked if there should be a reference to refer to the City Attorney for review. Ms. Honeywell advised that the intent is basically for procedural issues, giving finality to the action and is consistent with Roberts Rules of Order. Council Member Perkins suggested that the word except'. be deleted from Section 6.6 and Council concurred. Mayor Pena suggested that consent of the Presiding Officer" be added to Section 5.6 and Council concurred. Re also questioned the reference in Section 7.2 stating that every Council Member should vote unless disqualified for cause. Ms. Honeywell advised that that sentence could be deleted and Council concurred. Mayor Pena also questioned the word unanimous" in Section 7.3 and suggested changing it to read majority." Ms. Honeywell advised that the intent is to disallow continuing motions to reconsider an issue after it has been reconsidered one time, unless the Council is unanimously in favor of reconsidering it. She advised that the rule was derived from Roberts' Rules of Order BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 13 April 18, 1995 and could be deleted if Council so wished, but the unanimous" requirement implies that there was a major reason for reconsidering the motion. After some discussion, Council concurred on leaving it the wording in Section 7.3 as Is. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Ms. Honeywell advised, in reference to Section 7.2, that an abstention vote is not counted with the vote if there is no tie, but it is counted with the quorum. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, asked if newspaper publishing of the agenda and posting in other parts of the City could be included with the rules. Mayor Pena advised that the postings mentioned in the rules are the minimum requirements only and don't preclude additional postings or newspaper publishing of the agenda. As for posting locations, he advised that the rules are not site-specific. Council concurred that the wording be changed in Section 1.5 to read, 2) on a public bulletin board(s) located within the City. Council Member Cathcart referred to the growth of the City and advised that posting in three locations might need to be considered in the future. Council concurred on having the City Attorney make the suggested revisions and bring it back to Council. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to continue the Council's Rules of Procedure until May 2, 1995. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-79. 8. CONSIDE?ON OF ADOPTION OF RESOL?ON ACCEPTING DONATIONS RELATIVE TO LIBERTY MUTUAL LEGENDS OF GOLF TOURNAMENT. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney. advised Council to adopt a resolution accepting all of the passes related to the Liberty Mutual Legends of Golf Tournament scheduled to begin April 19th. She advised that the City Clerk would itemize the various passes on the resolution to document that the City had received them and suggested that the City Manager be authorized to distribute them. She advised that the passes were variable in nature, I.e. contestant passes, parking passes, etc. and were being compiled into a list by staff. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 14 April 18, 1995 Council Member Sniff questioned the equitableness in distributing the passes since they varied in value. He stated that in the past such passes were sometimes given to the Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Honeywell advised that the City's policy for receiving such donations in the past has been to receive them as a City and allow the City Manager to decide their distribution. Council Member Bangerter felt that it's important to support the event and have City personnel present. RESOLUTION NO.95-25 A RESOLUTION OF TIi CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE GIFT OF GUEST PARTICIPANT IN THE LIBERTY MUTUAL LEGENDS OF GOLF TOURNAMENT AND RELATED PASSES. It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-25 as recommended. Motion carried with Council Member Sniff ABSTAINING. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED APRIL 18, 1995. 2. AUTHORIZATION TO RECEIVE BIDS CITY-WIDE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT. 3. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRA'VEL FOR TWO CULTURAL AFFAIRS COMMISSION MEMBERS TO ATTEND THE NA?ONAL ASSEMBLY OF ARTS AGENCIES CONVE?ON IN SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA, JUNE 8-13, 1995. 4. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS BY THE FRIENDS OF THE LA QUINTA SENIOR CENTER. 5. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONGRESSIONAL APPROPRIATION OF LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS TO BLM FOR ACQUISITION OF LANDS IN THE SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS' NATIONAL SCENIC AREA. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with Items No.4 and 5 being approved by RESOLUTION NOS. 95-26 and 95-27 respectively. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-SO. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 15 April 18, 1995 STUDY SESSION None REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS REPORT OF COACHELLA VALLEY FRUT FLY ACTION COOPERATIVE TASK FORCE. Mr. Paul Ames, 81-715 Highway 111, Indlo, representing the Coachella Valley Fruit Fly Action Cooperative Task Force addressed the Council regarding the impact the Mediterranean Fruit Fly medfly) could have on the $330 million agricultural industry in the valley. He reviewed the impact it's had on other areas, advising that it's not native to this area, but may unknowingly be brought in from other areas things such as luggage. He advised that very little Hawaiian fruit is shipped out? of Hawaii because they have the medfly which demonstrates the impact it could have upon the valley's agricultural industry. Three recent finds were made in Los Angeles, Corona, and Ventura County. The only practical way to kill the medfly is with aerial spraying of malathion which was highly protested in Corona and delayed spraying. The spraying was finally allowed and the infesiation will eventually be eliminated. He advised that the infestation in Ventura County should be eliminated by July, 1995 because the spraying was not protested and began immediately after the find. He said that was due to pre- infestation education of the public regarding the necessity of spraying the malathion. He advised that 90% of the malathion spray is a syrup-bait that attracts the medfly with the remaining 10% the actual malathion. He advised that malathion is the same ingredient found in dog collars or backyard sprays and is not a threat to humanity. He urged the Council to help by understanding the seriousness of the problem should an infestation be found locally and help educate the public regarding preventative measures as well as the necessity to spray the malathion immediately upon a find. He advised that Ventura County demonstrated that the best action is to be prepared and act immediately. * Mayor Pena suggested that he contact the Chamber of Commerce to place an article in the newsletter on the issue. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Ames advised that in-state automobiles aren't usually inspected at border stations for fruit because of the interest in expediency in the State's policy. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Ames advised that public officials need to be informed of the urgency of the problem and the necessity to begin spraying malathion immediately upon a find. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 16 April 18, 1995 All other reports were noted and filed. Council recessed to Closed Session to and until the hour of 7:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION 1. Conference with real property negotiator Ned Millis pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding potential acquisition of property located at 77-885 Avenida Montezuma Applicant: La Quinta Ristorical Society. 2. Conference with legal counsel concerning ongoing litigation Atlas Enviroimiental City of La Quinta, and Kenko, Inc. vs City of La Quinta pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9. 3. Review and consideration of City Attorney contract pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. 7.00 P.M. PRESENTATIONS Ms. Lucia Moran, 52-385 Avenida Madero, gave a brief presentation on the recent Soap Box Derby held in La Quinta on March 25th. She advised that Derby entrants came from all over the valley and expressed appreciation to all of the sponsors: City of La Quinta, Boys & Girls Club of Coachella Yalley? The Desert Sun, Colony CableVision, Little John Printers, Swan Design, Waste Management of the Desert, Stouffers Esmeralda, and the Two Two Two Club. She advised that many donations were also given to supply the cars needed by the 44 entrants and approximately 500 valley residents showed up to watch. She also expressed appreciation to Danny Johnson, Adolfo Cabrera, and Kiki Montellano of the Public Works Department for their work beyond the call of duty. She hoped that the City of La Quinta would support the event again next year. Mayor Pena presented plaques to Lucia Moran, Don Berry, and Laura Cross for their participation in organizing the Soap Box Derby. Others not present to receive their awards were: Gordon Erickson, Cheryl Erickson, Marni Francisco, Rick Kanow, Debbie Madison, Tony Molina, Dan Newman, Gretchen Perez, Steve Schofield, and Rad Domingo. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 17 April 18, 1995 PUBLIC COMMENT Ms. Connie Baty, 78-900 Sonesta Way, as a parent, teacher, and resident of La Quinta, was concerned about the City's ordinance on sexually-oriented businesses. She submitted petitions signed by 150+ residents who feel that crime has increased, property values decreased, and quality of life lowered in areas where such businesses are allowed to exist. She advised that she and a group of residents believe that the City needs a strong ordinance in effect to regulate sexually-oriented businesses. She urged the Council to consider this vital issue and place it on their agenda as soon as possible. Mayor Pena advised that the Council has already obtained ordinances from neighboring cities on this issue and is in the process of reviewing background information. Ms. Laurie Shields, 44-185 Sonesta Way, advised that business owners contacted by her were amazed that the City didn't have a stronger ordinance in effect for sexually-oriented businesses. She advised that those businesses were supportive of their group's effort to get a str6nger ordinance in effect. Mayor Pefia advised that the Council wishes to adopt the strongest ordinance legally allowed. Mr. Jolin Dillan, 78-970 Sonesta Way, commented that he moved to La Quinta approximately one year ago because it was an excellent neighborhood in which to raise his family. He wished for the City to have a stronger ordinance in effect to regulate sexually-oriented businesses and urged the Council to take positive steps in that direction. Mr. Joe Garza, 50-550 Calle Quito, said that he agreed with the comments made by the other speakers. Mr. Ernie Brazil, 44-400 Buttercup Lane, compared the length of the City's ordinance on sexually-oriented businesses in comparison to that of the City of lndio and felt that La Quinta's ordinance should be more explicit. Mr. BW Scott, 52-035 Eisenhower Drive, spoke regarding the Cove improvement projects. Re questioned why improvement phases completed two years ago are still without landscaping and lighting. Mr. Dick Lutes, 54-424 Tanglewood, questioned why residents are assessed for the Fritz Burns Park each year when construction of the park continues to be delayed. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 18 April 18, 1995 Ms. Connie Baty, asked the Council for a more definite timeframe in which the adult ordinance would be addressed on the agenda. Ms. Honeywell. City Attorney, suggested that the issue could be discussed as a study session item in about 30 days. PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC MEETING LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1, FISCAL YEAR 1995/96. Mr. Cosper. Public Works Director, advised that the Landscape & Lighting Act of 1972 requires the City to conduct a public meeting and public hearing befQre increasing any assessments. On March 21, 1995. the Council set two meeting dates for that purpose. April 18,1995 and May 16, 1995, publishing those meeting dates in the Desert Stin as well as mailing 7,000 informal notices to La Quinta property owners. The purpose of the present meeting was to give an overview of the Preliminary Engineer's Report and respond to public comments. He advised that the Preliminary Engineer's Report showed a slight increase in Equivalent Dwelling Units EDU) totaling 23,522. He stated that the report proposes one Citywide benefit zone and six local benefit zones with a proposed Citywide assessment of $43IEDU and local benefit zone assessments ranging from $1.54/EDU to $8.83/EDU. laast year's revenue came in under budget because the sub-zone assessments were deleted and assessment to the annexation to the south was eliminated. He advised that the proposed budget for 1995/96 is $1,014,000, noting that the City took on new facilities with estimated maintenance cost of $35,000. Commercial areas and facilities located on major thoroughfares 4+ lanes) are included in the Citywide benefit zone. Local benefit zones are defined as areas where public landscaping facilities are on non-major thoroughfares. He also reviewed the change in the formula used to determine assessments on vacant, non-residential parcels that are 20+ acres. The Citywide assessment increased from $35/EDU to $43/EDU because of costs previously funded through larger sub-zone assessments, the reduction in assessments for the large vacant parcels, and addition of the new $35,000 facilities. He then reviewed the local benefit zone assessments for La Quinta Highlands, Rancho Ocotillo, Cactus Flower, Acacia Homes, La Quinta del Oro, and Topaz The Mayor declared the PUBLIC EARING OPEN. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, commented that not much had changed since the Landscape & Lighting District was discussed last year, pointing out that median strips still don't exist north of Highway 111. He questioned the equitableness of residents north of Highway 111 being required to help pay for landscaped medians in other parts BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 19 April 18, 1995 of the City while being solely responsible for their own small entrances Into their individual subdivisions. He felt that the 23% increased Citywide assessment had not been substantiated and that it was premature to include the maintenance of the Fritz Burns Park pool since it hasn't been approved yet. He didn't believe that the residents are getting their money's worth out of the assessment and referred to the non-working lights at the entrance of La Quinta Highlands that haven't worked for some time. He felt that it was too optimistic to include the perimeter landscape maintenance of the Topaz and Quinterra developments during 1995/96 as well as the estimated $35,000 for such maintenance. He pointed out that assessments are simply additional taxes to property owners. Mr. Vern Embery, 54-965 Avenida Vallejo, felt that the proposed Fritz Burns Park area is an eyesore in the community as well as Avenue 52 between Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive. Re moved here to pay lower taxes and is now paying $500 more than he did in San Diego. Ile referred to properties in the community that are in a state of disrepair and asked why City ordinances aren't enforced to eliminate such blight'. He felt that landscaping & lighting in the Cove area should be improved and noted that there are non?working lights and obliterated stop signs in those areas that have been landscaped. Mr. Lou Glick, 44-270 Villeta Drive, stated that the proposed assessment for La Quinta Vistas is an increase of 34% over last year. He believed that there were discrepancies in the staff report and noted that the increased budget from $871,000 to $1 million is only a 16% increase, but the assessment increased from 23% to 34%. He wished to see a budget that details the expenditures. He understood that $200,000 was transferred to the pool account last year and asked if it would be remitted to the Landscaping & Lighting District. Mr. Frank Reynolds, 49-294 Avenida Vista Bonita, commented that he wrote a letter to the Council last year on behalf of the Santa Rosa Cove Homeowner's Association and never received a response. They have the same concerns this year as staff's proposal is not significantly different from last year's. He understood that assessments are to be based on benefits received and felt that a flat-rate across the City fails to be equitable. He advised that residents in gated-communities pay for their own perimeter landscaping through their Homeowner Associations and questioned why they and residents in the Cove have to subsidize developments in north La Quinta that chose not to have Homeowner Associations. He said that in past assessments, gated-communities were assessed for median strips on major streets throughout the City, but not mini-parks in the Cove or perimeter landscaping in north La Quinta. He felt that Santa Rosa Cove residents are paying the same assessment that residents in north La Quinta are paying, but without the same benefit. He questioned why Eisenhower Drive, Cal le Tampico, and Washington Street lack landscaping, urging the Council to take a hard look at the assessments and return to special benefit zones where residents are assessed equitably. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 20 April 18, 1995 Mr. Wally Reynolds, 79-860 Fiesta Drive, asked the Council to clarify the Fritz Burns Park and pool maintenance portion of the Landscaping & Lighting District budget. Mr. James Mann, 48-695 San Vicente, President of the La Quinta Golf Estates Homeowner's Association, stated that he agreed with Mr. Frank Reynolds' comments. They pay a Citywide assessment and yet no landscaping has been done on Eisenhower Drive between Avenue 50 and Washington Street or on Washington Street itself. He wasn't complaining about the increase, but wished to see more action for the money spent. There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC IIEARING CLOSED. Mayor Pefia advised that the Council has tried to find the most equitable method for determining the Landscaping & Lighting assessment over the last few years. Re advised that they thought they had accomplished that by nearly eliminating the special benefit zone assessments, based on public input last year. Mr. Cosper responded to the public comments as follows: 1) There are current maintenance costs involved with the Fritz Burns Park because tennis courts and a small park area are currently maintained there. 2) The amount included with last year's budget for the Fritz Burns Park and pool were used to offset the shortage in revenues due to the elimination of sub-zones last year. 3) The City has initiated a low-cost maintenance program by replacing high water-use plants with Palm Springs gold on the Avenue 50 and Avenue 52 median strips. In an attempt to improve the landscaping service, heavy penalties have been imposed for failed service. 4) Perimeter landscaping at new developments become the City's responsibility to maintain 90 days after a phase that includes such landscaping is completed. 5) The dead trees in the Fritz Burns Park area should be removed within the next few months during the construction of the park. 6) Non-working lights are replaced soon after they are reported. However, in areas where they are vandalized frequently, they won't be replaced until a more vandalism-proof type light can be afforded. 7) In reference to staff report discrepancies, he advised that last year's Citywide assessment of $871,000 didn't include the proposed revenues from the sub-zones that were later eliminated. The total budget for all zone assessments was $1,001,000, but was reduced to $993,000 after adjustments. Revenues were affected when an annexation to the south was not allowed to be assessed and the sub-zones were eliminated. 8) Administrative costs were reduced this year because some of last year's costs are not included this year and there was an additional savings of $10,000 in the noticing process. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 21 April 18, 1995 9) It was determined that all residents benefit from landscaping and lighting on major thoroughfares since everyone uses them. 10) Most of the sub-zones were dropped this year because of their complication as well as the number of public requests to do so last year. The lowest combined rate of Citywide and Special District assessments last year would have been $43/EDU, making this year's assessment within the ball park. 11) Additional landscaping in median areas is being addressed through the Capital Improvement Program, but if approved will increase maintenance costs even more. Approximately two acres of landscaping can be added each year at the City's current rate of growth without increasing fees, but anything beyond that would increase fees. Mayor Pena encouraged the audience to make an appointment with Mr. Cosper if they needed additional information or clarification on their comments. Council Member Cathcart asked Mr. Cosper to clarify the maintenance amounts for the Fritz Burns Park and pool. Mr. Cosper advised that the $70,000 proposed to be set aside for the pool from the. Landscaping & Lighting District fund would be for utility costs, noting that programming costs would be paid through other sources. Park maintenance costs are $91,340. Mr. Jeff Cooper, a consultant from BSI, advised that in the past the Council has received many comments in opposition to sub-zones and he felt comfortable that the City's Citywide benefit definition is consistent with the Landscape & Lighting Act of 1972. After much study, the definition of Citywide benefit was redefined which eliminated the three sub-zones. He felt that the newly-defined Citywide zone is more equitable and the need for sub-zones has diminished because the improvements are more on a Citywide-basis now. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Cosper advised that no capital expenditures are anticipated in this budget and all costs are for maintenance. Council Member Sniff felt that $1 million for maintenance costs was a lot of money considering the limited amount of landscaped areas the City has. He asked if there was any way to reduce that amount and questioned how the City would ever be able to afford to landscape the areas that now lay dormant. Mayor Pefia advised that the whole Council would like to see landscaping on major thoroughfares such as Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive because they are entrances to the City and its major revenue generator, the La Quinta Hotel. He felt that it should be done, even if only on a minimal basis. Council Member Cathcart asked if a preliminary?study had been done to estimate the cost of landscaping of the remaining median strips. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 22 April 18, 1995 Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that those areas have been studied, but funding sources have to be addressed when contemplating such expenditures. Use of Landscaping & Lighting District funds would initiate an increase in assessments and so alternate funding sources such as the infrastructure funds have been looked at. He advised that that would be addressed in the Capital Improvement Program, but noted that additional landscaping will increase maintenance costs and strategic timing for those improvements is important. Council Member Sniff felt that the present landscaping must be labor intensive and that the concerns of the residents should be addressed because their assessments are going up without any additional improvements. Mr. Cosper advised that more than 50% of the City's facilities are maintained by outside operators through competitive bidding and more stringent contract specifications should increase service levels and reduce costs. Water consumption has been reduced through use of computerized watering systems and new specifications for landscaping are being developed to ensure lower-maintenance. Council Member Sniff asked if a priority list had been established for the additional two acres for each year that would be landscaped under the Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Genovese advised that that list would be included with. the Capital Improvement Program presentation. Council Member Sniff suggested that landscaping be done in phases, beginning with some type of greenery then making additions over a course of time that wouldn't disrupt the previous landscaping. Mayor Pena advised that this issue has been discussed for a couple of years and felt that perhaps unlandscaped areas should begin with minimal landscaping and move on forward from there. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Genovese advised that the priority list of improvements will be in the Capital Improvement Program Report at the next meeting. However, to put in place even minimal improvements, an increase in the assessment would be required unless other funding sources are used. He advised that that list will include preliminary costs of maintenance for each area. Council Member Sniff referred to Mr. Reynolds' letter that was not responded to and asked why gated-communities are required to help subsidize other developments through the Citywide assessment. Mr. Cosper advised that in the Feasibility Report an attempt was made to establish equitability among everyone who travels on major thoroughfares by assessing everyone BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 23 April 18, 1995 on a Citywide basis, including gated-communities. In non-major thoroughfares, it was assumed that those living in individual subdivisions would receive the benefit of enjoying landscaped areas there and that's how special benefit districts were determined. Staff determined that landscaping on major thoroughfares, including back-up landscaping, enhances property value on a Citywide basis. Individual entrance medians are more likely to enhance property values only within that subdivision. Council Member Sniff advised that he's always had a concern on the equity of benefits and how to get citizens to understand that the benefits they receive are worth the taxes they pay. Mayor Pejia advised that the Council has always tried to address that concern which is why the three sub-zones were eliminated last year. He referred to the various areas in which the Council has responded to the public's wishes such as increased police protection and recreation programs, noting that Council tries to be as proactive as possible with the City's limited amount of resources. However, it's difficult sometimes to maintain the service levels wanted by the public without increasing taxes. He felt that the Council will try to address the concerns they've heard. Council Member Perkins felt that north La Quinta does not get their fair benefit share of the assessment revenue. He believed that median strips shouldn't be installed unless funds are available to landscape them. He referred to the unlandscaped median strips along Eisenhower Drive in front of the La Quinta Hotel and noted that that hotel brings more revenue into the City than all the other businesses. Re advised that in Laguna de La Paz homeowners pay $30/month for their landscaping in addition to the City's assessment. Re said that he would support staff's proposal if he could see some benefit along Washington Street, Eisenhower Drive, and in north La Quinta and be assured that new medians won't be installed until the improvements and maintenance can be afforded. He referred to the low-maintenance median landscaping in the City of Palm Desert, noting that he seldom sees maintenance personnel working on those medians. He felt that the Council should look at fairness to all the residents, but realized that there will always be some inequities. He believed that Council's main concern should be how the money is received and how it's spent. He couldn't see continuing with beautiful landscaping in some areas while other areas such as Washington Street have nothing. Council Member Bangerter asked if creating special benefit zones again would help to landscape vacant median strips and how difficult it would be to obtain that comparison. Mr. Cosper advised that it was too late to make such a change for this fiscal year because the Engineer's Report is based on six small sub-zones, but the numbers could be put together. Mayor Pejia suggested that citizen groups be formed to give public input on next year's report to help make things more equitable. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2City Council Minutes 24 April 18, 1995 In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the report must be recorded by the first week in August and there is one more public hearing. He also advised that the specified funds cannot be used for capital improvements. Council Member Perkins asked if there were savings in the City's contract landscape service, could they be used elsewhere and Mr. Cosper said that they could. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cooper advised that Council would have the option of spending any surplus funds on improvements allowed by the 1972 Act, particularly on Citywide benefits such as Washington Street. However, those funds could not be used on very localized projects which would benefit local areas only. In regards to gated communities, he suggested the possibility of developing some type of credit mechanism for those areas or give them the option of relinquishing their maintained areas along major arterials back to the City to be included in a Citywide zone. Mr. Cosper advised that inclusion of perimeter landscaping along gated-commuhities would increase the assessment significantly for everyone even though it's spread over a broad base. Mayor Pefia advised that the next public hearing on this issue would be held on May 16, 1995. Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened. DEPARTMENT REPORTS A. UPDATE ON ROAD AND BRIDGE BENEFIT DISTRICT. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that CVAG has requested approval of an implementation agreement for the proposed Road & Bridge Benefit District. However, staff suggested that an alternate approach be taken to fund La Quinta's contribution to the District such as equal contributions from the Redevelopment Agency of $50,000/yearly for 20 years or implementing the fee into the City's fee study. He advised that discussions with CVAG have revealed that it's no longer necessary for all five of the previously proposed cities to be involved in the District, noting that the City of Indian Wells has chosen to use a similar approach. He advised that CVAG is not opposed to staff's suggested approach and staff will come back to Council at the next meeting with a method for consideration. BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02 2 City Council Minutes 25 April 18, 1995 Mayor Pefia thought that the City of Rancho Mirage was taking a similar approach. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that CVAG has scheduled a public hearing on June 14th, but he didn't foresee a problem with the City moving forward with their approach at the same time. Mr. Genovese advised that Council will need to provide CVAG with a Letter of Intent so that they can move forward with their own ordinance without the City, but didn't believe that any action was necessary at the present time other than an outline of the City's approach. Re said that staff will attend CYAG's meeting on Friday. Re advised that the proposed approach will mean that the City will contribute to the District without being a part of it or the liability concerns that go along with it. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS Mayor Pena advised that yesterday he, Council Member Cathcart, and the City Manager had an opportunity to attend a forum for Congressman Sonny Bono and felt that he will be working with all of the communities. Council recessed to Closed Session as delineated on Page 16. Council reconvened to regular session and concluded a Closed Session under 54957.6 and voted to approve the contract for services for City Attorney and Special Counsel with Dawn C. Honeywell and Rutan and Tucker on a unanimous vote. The contract is available for public review in the City Clerk's offices. Council concluded a Closed Session under 54956.9 and voted to approve a settlement agreement by and between the City of La Quinta and Atlas Environmental Services, Inc and Kenko, Inc. and Hartford Accident and Indenmity Company. The agreement is available for public review in the City Clerk's offices. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. AUNDRA L. ROLA, City Clerk City of Ia Quinta, California BIB] 12-12-95-U01 03:40:17PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 04-U02 18-U02 95-U02