Loading...
1995 07 18 CC Minutes LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 18, 1995 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on July 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 Council Member Bangerter suggested that Business Session Item No.5 be taken up after Study Session Item No. 1. Council concurred. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of June 22, 1995 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of July 5, 1995 as submitted. Council Member Cathcart noted a typographical error relative to staff costs involved in producing a newsletter Page 6) he believed that the figure of $3,500 should have been $35,000. Clerk's note: The figure of $3,500 was correct as recorded. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS None PRESENTATIONS Mayor Pena presented Phyllis Manley, Deputy City Clerk II, with a plaque expressing the City's appreciation for being chosen to receive the Employee Recognition Award. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 2 July 18, 1995 PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Tom Kirk, 46-043 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert, Director of Human Community & Environmental Resources of CVAG, advisedthat he recently accepted the position at CVAG and is looking forward to getting acquainted with City Council Members as well as staff. * * * * * * * * * * * * *** Ms Carolyn Lair, 78-080 Avenida La Fonda, Executive Director of La Quinta Arts Foundation, advised that the Foundation recently learned that the City has received a Minor Temporary Outdoor Event application from West Coast Artists for the purpose of producing a fine arts festival November 24-26, 1995 at the La Quinta Sculpture Park. She advised that West Coast Artists and the La Quinta Sculpture Park are both private businesses that operate for profit as opposed to the Arts Foundation which is a non-profit organization tnandated by the City to produce two fine arts festival events each year. Through the Foundation's events, they are to market the City, encourage grass-roots involvement and support that contributes to positive community building through arts and culture, and to generate revenues that are returned to the community through public programming, scholarships, and public art work such as the Bear Creek Bike Path. She was concerned that the similar name and proposed timing of the proposed event will be confused with the Foundation's own art festivals held during November and March each year. She urged the Council to consider the impact the proposed event could have upon the Foundation's own festival. She advised that the Foundation would like to be the City's sole producer of fine arts festivals, but if that's not possible, they recommend that the Foundation be named as the sole producer of public art events/festivals within the City during November and March each year as long as they are under contract with the City to produce those events. They also recommend that any other art events/festivals carry a name distinctly different from the Foundation's copy-written names of La Quinta Arts Festival and La Quinta Fall Festival of the Arts. She asked the Council to direct staff to review this matter and report back to Council the necessary policy amendments to implement the Foundation's recommendations and postpone the processing of West Coast Artists' application until such review is complete. Council Member Sniff felt that other art events should be allowed, but that the City should try to ensure the success of the two events it contracts with the Foundation to produce. Re was in favor of having staff review the matter and report back to the Council. Council concurred. Mr. John Curtis, 78-253 Tamarisk, Palm Desert, representative of La Quinta Rotary, presented a check in the amount of $6,000 as final payment for the Spirit of La Quinta" sculpture at the Civic Center. Mayor Pena expressed appreciation on behalf of the Council for the Rotary's donation. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 3 July 18, 1995 WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE Council Member Bangerter advised that Council has received a letter from Judy Vossler and felt that it should be addressed, possibly under Mayor and Council Members' Items. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the letter is scheduled to be agendized for the next meeting unless Council decides to discuss it at this meeting. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 BUDGET AND RECEIVE AND IIILE THE FIVE-YEAR RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN AND ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that Council has received copies of the Budget and Five-Year Resource Allocation Plan for review with changes made during the preliminary budget review indicated in the staff report. He expressed appreciation to the Council and staff for their input and assistance and voiced special thanks to John Falconer, Finance Director, for providing the new format. Mayor Pena felt that staff had done a great job on the report and was especially pleased with the increased funding for police protection, code enforcement, and traffic safety services. Council concurred. RESOLUTION NO.95-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 AND APPROVING A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995/96. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-57 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 2. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE LA QUINTA PAGEANT. Mr. Hartung, Building & Safety Director, advised that the Cultural Affairs Commission CAC) directed a steering committee to examine the possibility of producing an annual BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 4 July 8, 1995 outdoor event that would depict the history of the community. With some preliminary work begun, the steering committee feels that they now need professional assistance to prepare a budget and feasibility report for the project. The CAC recommends approval of funding in the amount of $5,000. Council Member Sniff felt that it's worthwhile to proceed with a feasibility study so that the Council can determine if they wish to move forward with the project. Council Member Bangerter commended the members of the steering committee for their efforts and believed that it's an incredible and exciting endeavor. She advised that there are many people in the theatrical and entertainment world that are anxious to work with the City on this project and she believes that it will be good for the City. Council Member Perkins questioned if the CAC's role should be to produce or simply supervise this project. He would support it, but would take a hard look at the CAC's role once the feasibility report has been completed. Council Member Bangerter advised that the CAC has no intention of producing the pageant. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to approve the funding for the feasibility study for the La Quinta Pageant in an amount not to exceed $5,000 from the General Fund Emergency Reserve. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-143. 3. CONSIDERATION OF A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE EXPANSION REQUEST LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENUE 56 AND NORTH OF AVENUE 59 BETWEEN MONROE STREET AND JACKSON STREET, APPROXIMATELY 800 ACRES. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the City has three sphere of influence areas and reviewed them on a map for the Council. The subject area under consideration is approximately 800 acres and located south of Avenue 56 and north of Avenue 59 between Monroe Street and Jackson Street. He advised that it was part of a five-year holding area included in a resolution, since expired, between the cities of La Quinta and Coachella which prohibited annexation of those properties. Property owners in that area have expressed an interest in becoming a part of the City of I?L Quinta's Sphere of Influence, submitting petitions representing 54% of the assessed land value and 59% of the land mass. Staff requested authorization to proceed with the Sphere of Influence application process. In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she hasn't reviewed the resolution between the twO cities. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 5 July 18, 1995 Mayor Pefia didn't believe that the resolution was legally binding in any way, but felt that Coachella should be notified as a courtesy. Council concurred. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to authorize staff to proceed with the Sphere of Influence Application process for an area located south of Avenue 56 between Monroe Street and Jackson Street, approximately 800 acres. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-144. 4. CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL APPOINTEE AND ALTERNATE TO CVAG'S IWMAN & COMMUNITY RESOURCES COMMITTEE AND APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. Mrs. Juhola, Administrative Services Director, advised that the Council needed to appoint a representative and alternate to the Human and Community Resources Committee and an alternate to the Transportation Committee. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to appoint Council Member Bangerter as the City's representative on CVAG's Human & Community Resources Committee and Council Member Cathcart as an alternate. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-145. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Bangerter/Cathcart to appoint Council Member Sniff as the alternate on CVAG's Transportation Committee. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-146. 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLACING AN ADVISORY MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER 7, 1995 BALLOT CONCERNING A COMMUNITY POOL. This item was taken up after Study Session Item No.1. See Page 13.) 6. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO.269. ORDINANCE NO.269 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2.70.030 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 6 July 18, 1995 It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Ordinance No.269 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Sniff asked that Consent Calendar Item No.3 be pulled for discussion. Council Member Perkins asked that Consent Calendar Item Nos. 5 and 6 be pulled for discussion. 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED 3ULY 18, 1995. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, TO ATTEND THE MMASC ANNUAL CONFERENCE IN DANA POINT, CALIFORNIA, AUGUST 10-11, 1995. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL FOR THE MAYOR TO JOIN A COACHELLA VALLEY OFFICIAL DELEGATION VISIT UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM, WASHINGTON D.C., OCTOBER 13-15, 1995. This item pulled with no action taken.) 4. AUTHORIZATION OF OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL FOR THE BUILDING & SAFETY DIRECTOR TO ATTEND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS' ANNUAL MEETING IN CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA, SEPTEMBER 9-14, 1995. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM TO ATTEND THE MAYORS' AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' EXECUTIVE FORUM IN MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA, JULY 26-28, 1995. 6. APPROVAL OF A REDUCTION IN SECURITY FOR TRACT 23913 QUINTERRA. 7. AUTHORIZATION TO RECEIVE BIDS TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO.95-03- FRED WARING DRIVE AND MILES AVENUE. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 7 July 18, 1995 S. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ART LOPEZ TO PREPARE DESIGN DOCUMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BEAR CREEK BIKE TRAIL. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-147. Re?ardiii? Item No.3: Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, was strongly opposed to travel authorization for Mayor Pena to participate in an official delegation visit to the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. He pointed out that the trip would cost more than the amount the City contributed to the Holocaust Memorial in Palm Desert. Re felt that both expenses should be privately funded and were inappropriate uses of City funds. He urged the Council to deny the travel authorization. Mayor Pena advised that the request was a result of an invitation from Virginia Criste who's forming the delegation. He advised that he hasn't made a commitment to make the trip yet and that the request is simply to find out if the Council has an interest in participating in the delegation. Council Member Perkins didn't feel that it's appropriate to spend taxpayers' money on such trips because it doesn't provide or bring anything back to the community. He advised that he wouldn't support It. Council Member Sniff didn't feel that it has any direct value to the City and wouldn't support it either. Council concurred. No action was taken on this matter. Re2ardifl2 Item No.5: Council Member Perkins asked if all Council Members had been polled for interest in attending and Mayor Pena advised that all Council Members received an invitation. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to approve overnight travel for the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem to attend the Annual Mayors' and Council Members' Executive Forum in Monterey, July 26-28, 1995 Consent Calendar Item No.5). Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-148. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 8 July 18, 1995 Re2ardin? Item No.6: Council Member Perkins asked if there were any outstanding complaints from property owners in that development. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the security reductions have been requested because many of the tract improvements have been completed and a new developer is taking over the tract. Re was unaware of any outstanding property owners complaints in that development. Council Member Perkins suggested that securities be reduced pending further check of outstanding complaints. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Sniff to approve the reduction in security for Tract 23913 as set forth in the staff report contingent upon staff's findings that no outstanding problems exist. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-149. STUDY SESSION FRITZ BURNS POOL DISCUSSION. Mayor Pena abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that Phase I of the Feasibility Report was prepared by Berryman & Henigar and assessed optional pool designs and operating configurations. Phase I of the two-phase report consisted of gathering and analyzing data related to pools, development of demographic information, and presentation of four to fiv? pool configurations. He advised that Phase II would further analyze these recommendations, including the development of a program fee structure, staffing needs, operating costs, and projected revenues. He advised that they contacted 23 cities and public agencies and asked them to provide information regarding pool-facility configurations, operating and maintenance costs, types and amounts of revenues received, end-use designs, personnel costs, and user figures. They received responses from 8 agencies representing a total of 12 pools, with 1/3 to 1/2 of those pools operating in the Coachella Valley. Demographic information for the Coachella Valley area was also developed regarding median ages, number of families, incomes, seasonal homeowners, and population growth rates. Re reviewed the pool data contained in the report which reported an average cost recovery. of 42% for the 12 pools and 59.4% for the pools operated by Coachella Valley Recreation & Parks District CVRPD). Cost recoveries ranged from 20% to 70% with higher recoveries affected by shorter operating seasons, lower operation/maintenance costs, and additional revenues received from recreational programs and concession stands. Re advised that each of the six, pool configuration BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 9 July 18, 1995 options included a pool size of 25 yards by 25 meters and office and locker room sizes ranging from 1,500 sq. ft. to 4,000 sq. ft. The following average unit costs were used to evaluate the six options: 7C per day for each square foot of pool area for operation/maintenance costs; 3c per day for each square foot of pool area for revenues received; and $166 per square foot for construction costs. He reviewed the six pool configuration options and recommended dropping Options I & 2 because of low cost recoveries, Options 3 & 4 because of high construction and operating costs, and Option 6 because it's similar to Option 5 which is the option recommended by staff. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the construction cost for Option 5 is $1,579,490 and includes design costs. Council Member Cathcart asked if population figures were available for the areas served by the 12 pools. Mr. Cosper advised that the population figures of the cities didn't necessarily correspond with the area served by the pools, making it very difficult to tie the demographics into the areas without a complete inventory of all the pools. Council Member Cathcart said he would like to know what pools are available in the Cerritos and Vista areas because of their high-use rate. He advised that those areas are densely populated which would account for the high number of users if other pools aren't available. Council Member Sniff noted that all of the pools in the report are 15 + years old and wondered if they include sufficient amenities to attract users. He felt that it's important to promote and market a community pool to make it successful and wondered if any of these pools had been marketed properly. Mr. Cosper advised that staff assumed that each public pool was run in a similar manner with the exception of the Vista pool which is marketed and highly successful. Council Member Sniff felt that it's important to produce a pool that is marketable and pointed out that the more successful pools provide a variety of uses and activities. Mr. Cosper advised that concession stands are important amenities and help generate revenues, as do very active recreation programs. Council Member Sniff felt that it's important to construct an affordable, yet modern facility with diverse functions. It should be done right or not at all. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter, Mr. Cosper confirmed that the average, cost- recovery percentage for pools operated by CVRPD was 59.4%. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 10 July 18, 1995 Council Member Perkins felt that a question regarding the nearest municipal pool should have been part of the data gathering process since that would affect the attendance. He asked what the average number of days of operation was for the 12 pools. Mr. Cosper advised that the average for the 12 pools was 151 days, but three of those pools operate year-round, making the average 60 to 90 days for the remaining 9 pools. The following people spoke in support of the pool: Ms. Carolyn Lair 53-585 Avenida Ramirez Mr. Enrique Gutierrez 52-287 Avenida Ramirez Ms. Leah Aguilar 78-520 Bottlebrush The following people spoke in opposition to the pool: Mr. Keith Palmer 79-805 Westward Ho Drive Mr. Paul Camer 79-755 Westward Ho Drive Ms. Joyce Sivley 79-775 Westward Ho Drive Mr. Robert Tyler 44-215 Villeta Drive Mr. Wally Reynolds 79-860 Fiesta Drive Mr. Martin Close 79-885 Horseshoe Road Ms. Terry Henderson 54-711 Eisenhower Drive, disagreed with Council Member Sniff's comment that the City should aggressively market the pool if it's built. Mr. Randall Wright 54-295 Eisenhower Drive Mr. Don McClelland 79-815 Westward Ho Drive Mr. Jack Sohelman 52-815 Avenida Martinez Mr. Pete Platamone 79-575 Marigold Lane Council Member Perkins believed that the reduction in property taxes experienced by many in the City will have an impact on the City and Redevelopment Agency, noting that his own property tax has dropped 22%. He felt that the Council should be more conservative with City funds and take notice that other government agencies are having to lay off employees because of the state of the economy. He advised that he initially supported the pool and has met since with both the supporters and opponents. His understanding at that time was that it would operate year-round and feels that the currently proposed limited operation is a poor use of $1.5 million of the City's funds. He advised that the City's financial situation was better when it built the Senior Center and Civic Center than it is now and that the reserves are much lower than they should be. He felt that this is not a north vs. south issue nor seniors vs. younger-generation issue, but rather an affordability issue. Council Member Sniff advised that the intent of his comment regarding marketing of the pool, should it be built, was to have functional programs that would attract users. He felt that the only solution at this time is to put the issue on the ballot for an advisory vote BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 11 July 18, 1995 to gain a clear consensus of the public. Although he felt that the pool would be a nice asset to the City, he wan't in favor of spending any more money on it until the Council hears from the people what they want. Council Member Cathcart felt that it's a matter of cost. He advised that, after thoroughly researching the issue, he's reached the conclusion that it's not a good idea at the present time. He was disappointed in the study, believing that it was inadequate and only confirmed the information already received from CVRPD at the last meeting. He said that Don Martin's advice, of CVRPD, is to build a small pool in conjunction with a recreation center. He felt that the Council should decide whether or not to proceed with Phase II of the Feasibility Study. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter thanked the staff for their work on this project and the public for working so hard to make this the best community possible. She pointed out that the City is not made up only of businesses, history, and culture, but of families and needed social programs which she supports. She advised that she was elected by the strongest majority ever of the people and feels a deep sense of responsibility to represent the City's working class by trying to implement in their community, the things that are important to them as the silent majority. She continues to believe that the pool is important to the people of the community and pointed out that the Council, after years of planning, was about to award the contract for construction when the process was stopped. She felt that CVRPD's proposal was excellent and beyond what she had anticipated, yet the opponents continue to oppose the pool after implying that they would accept a compromise if costs were reduced and the need for taxes through an assessment district was eliminated. She's not opposed to working with CVRPD on a recreation center sometime in the future, but advised that a beautiful gymnasium exists in the Boys & Girls Club that can be used for recreation programs. She felt that there's a great need for a community pool, advising that many of the classes at Truman Elementary use the Pawley Pool in lndio for class parties each year. She stated that it's apparent that the high school pool is not a family- oriented pool, nor is it equipped for the handicapped. She didn't believe that the pool opponents are as opposed to the pool as they are frustrated that needed improvements in their neighborhoods are not being done. She pointed out however, that the funds set aside for the pool cannot be used for police protection or infrastructure improvements, but must be used for recreation. She advised that CVRPD's proposed operation/maintenance costs are much lower than staff's estimate in December because CVRPD's proposal is for a four-to-five-month limited program and staff's was for a year-round, competitive program. She felt that it's a shame that CVRPD's proposal is not being accepted. She supports the Senior Center, noting that it costs nearly $200,000 annually for operation and maintenance and had an average daily attendance in June of 70 people. However, she didn't understand how the Council is supposed to decide which social programs to support. She felt that a community pool is important to the community because it will help build stronger family ties. She advised that through the CVRPD proposal, the pool's operation/maintenance costs would be $27,000 and paid through the General Fund, not an assessment district, and would diminish $1,400 each BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 12 July 18, 1995 year. She added that the savings from the construction costs, approximately $450,000, can be used for median landscaping. She advised that she will continue to support the pool until a final decision is made. Council Member Perkins advised that he was elected by a 76-vote margin, but believes that Council Members are equally responsible for representing the people. He felt that the pool issue could have been resolved if the pool survey last summer had included the proper questions. He was also concerned that any ballot measure contain the proper language. He didn't feel that it's proper to compare the Senior Center with the pool or anything else, nor is the City required to have a pool just because it has a Senior Center. He felt that construction costs will be higher than projected after change orders are added. He asked staff what the contingency percentage is. Mr. Cosper advised that all project costs include a contingency amount that is kept to a minimum, ranging from 5% to 10%. Council Member Perkins advised that that 10% would add another $150,000 to construction costs, making it considerably higher than the $1.1 million set aside for the pool. He advised that the public has asked government to spend their money on basic necessities. He felt that the recent addition of one police officer and one code enforcement officer was insufficient. Re stated that the City can't be all things to all people. Council Member Cathcart didn't feel that a comparison between the Boys & Girls Club and a recreation center was any different than a comparison between the high school pool and a pool at Fritz Burns Park, noting that family activities can't be done most of the time at the Boys & Girls Club. He was frustrated about the indefinite delay of a number of capital improvement projects and is one reason why he's opposed to the pool project. He didn't believe there would be any opposition to the pool if it could be built with the $1, 1 million that has been set aside for its construction, but he was opposed to using capital improvement funds for the project. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter felt that the youth are more likely to use the Boys & Girls Club facility after school at a $5/year annual fee as opposed to another recreation center because of its easy access. She pointed Out also that the Boys & Girls Club gymnasium is available for use, but is unused for several hours each day. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Cathcart/Perkins to not go forward with the Fritz Burns Park Pool Phase II Study. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Cosper advised that the cost of Phase II of the Feasibility Study would be $9,000 and would provide a more detailed analysis of the option(s) in Phase I. The cost of both phases of the study would be approximately $18,000 BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 13 July 18, 1995 Council Member Cathcart felt that Phase I of the study confirmed CVRPD's numbers, making Phase II unnecessary should the Council select CVRPD to run the pool. Council Member Perkins felt that further studies will only prolong the Council making a decision on this issue. Motion carried with Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter voting NO and Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-150. BUSINESS SESSION.......................continued 5. CONSIDERATION OF PLACING AN ADVISORY MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER 7, 1995 BALLOT CONCERNING A COMMUNITY POOL. Mrs. Juhola, Administrative Services Director, advised that the deadline to place the pool issue on the November 7th ballot is August 11th and the last scheduled City Council meeting prior to that date is August 1st. Council Member Perkins felt that a decision on the pool issue is the Council's responsibility, but if the wording on the ballot measure is clear, he would consider supporting a motion to place the issue on the ballot for an advisory vote. Council Member Sniff advised that he's felt for some time that a ballot measure is the proper direction for the Council to take on this issue, noting that many residents feel the same and he hoped that the Council would support it. Re, too, believed that the language was a critical issue, Re suggested the following wording: Should the City of La Quinta build a municipal pool at the Fritz Burns Park at an approximate cost of $________ with estimated operating costs of $_______ under a management contract with Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District or another agency)? Re advised that the cost of placing this issue on the ballot would be minimal since it's an election year and he felt that it's time to gain a consensus from the public regarding the pool. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter agreed that the construction and operation costs should be included in the wording, and with the permission of CVRPD, to. include their proposal. She felt that the wording should be simple and clear as to what the advisory vote is for. She felt that the Council should make a decision on whether or not to place the issue on the ballot for an advisory vote and then decide on the wording at the next meeting. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 14 July 18, 1995 Council Member Perkins advised that he's not prepared to make that decision until the wording is certain and agreed that it should be easily understood. He stated that further explanations could be included in the arguments for and against the issue. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that pro and con arguments are not normally done for advisory votes. Other interested parties could draft their pros and cons, but she didn't believe that they would be a part of the ballot. She advised that she would research the argument issue for the Council. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to direct staff to come back with an outline of what Council Member Sniff had suggested with the simplest and shortest possible language including construction and maintenance costs, and making sure that CVRPD will stand by their proposal. Council Member Cathcart advised that he would generally support the motion, provided that the difference between the $2.1 million originally allocated for the project and the amount determined to be placed on the ballot as the construction-cost amount, be reappropriated for use on other capital improvement programs. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that reappropriation of funds could be handled at the same time the ballot language is dealt with. Council Member Cathcart advised that CVRPD has suggested that they can build a 60' X 80' pool with a 15,000 sq. ft. recreation center for $1.5 million to $1.6 million, but higher operation costs. He suggested that Council consider placing a question on the ballot regarding an assessment district to pay for operation of a combined facility, at an approximate assessment of $10 per household. Council Member Sniff wasn't opposed to considering the placement of a second ballot measure on the ballot, but was adamant that the pool issue should be dealt with separately. Mr. Robert Metkus, felt that it's unfair to ask the voters about an assessment district because not all voters are property owners and it's the property owners that have to pay the assessment. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, was supportive of placing the issue on the ballot, but was concerned that the costs be clarified first. Re didn't understand why it couldn't be a binding vote instead of an advisory vote. Ms. Honeywell advised that zoning and master plan decisions, which are legislative actions, have already been made. The remaining decision on the project is to authorize funds which fall in the administrative authority of the Council and, therefore, would not be appropriate for an initiative or referendum. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 15 July 18, 1995 Ms. Terry 54-711 Eisenhower Drive, also felt that construction and operation costs need clarification because the maintenance costs will be year-round, not just during the four-to-five-month period of operation. She felt that the Council should make the decision and only go to a ballot measure if they had a 2-2-split decision. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that a contingency of 5% to 10% is included in the $1.5 million construction cost and the $1.59 million figure includes the full design package as opposed to the $1.4 million which is a revision to the plans on hand. Council Member Perkins felt that the 60-90-day operation period of the pool is information that should be included on the ballot. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter felt that the Council should decide whether they want to place the issue on the ballot or not and then give their language suggestions to the City Attorney and staff on an individual basis who can then submit language options for Council to consider at the next meeting. She also felt that a commitment from CVRPD should be obtained as well. Council Member Cathcart didn't have a problem with making a decision regarding the ballot issue as long as it's subject to final language approval. Mr. Randall Wright, 54-295 Eisenhower Drive, felt that two issues exists a decision to place the issue on the ballot and approval of the language. Re expressed confidence in the Council and staff to come up with language that would satisfy all parties involved. Mr. Jack Sobelman, 52-815 Avenida Martinez, was opposed to placing the issue on the ballot because he felt that it's the Council's responsibility. He felt that the Council should approve the pool when it's been proven that it can pay its own way, and not before. Mr. Gary Tomak, 54-991 Tanglewood, advised that there's a difference between needs and wants and he felt that it's wrong to waste taxpayer's dollars to pay for a pool that will only benefit a few people. Ms. Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, was distressed that some of the Council Members still refuse to support the pool in spite of the fact that the maintenance costs were reduced to an affordable cost. She supported placing the issue on the ballot as long as the language doesn't refer to an assessment district or recreation center. Council Member Cathcart asked if the words not to exceed? could be included in the language of the ballot measure to which Ms. Honeywell responded yes because an advisory vote is not binding. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 16 July 18, 1995 Council Member Cathcart wished to see no further work on this issue on the part of staff until this issue is resolved. Council Member Perkins had a problem with the wording of the motion, believing that it limits the language to Council Member Sniff's suggestion. Council Member Cathcart asked if reappropriation of the balance of the funds should be included in the motion. Mr. Genovese advised that if Council so directs, staff would have to outline that in the report as the funding is addressed. Council Member Cathcart wished to have it included in the motion. Motion was withdrawn. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to direct staff to come back with a ballot measure relating to a municipal pool at the Fritz Burns Park) with the recommended language as to numbers and operating costs. Council Member Perkins agreed with Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter's recommendation that all ballot language suggestions should be given to staff for incorporation into a report to Council. Mr. Genovese advised that staff will present various language options for the Council's consideration at the next meeting. Motion carried unaniniously. MINUTh ORDER NO.95-151. Council recessed to and until the hour of 7:00 p?m. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT None BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 17 July 8, 1995 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF APPEAL BY THE APPLICANT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DEMAL OF CERTIFICATION OF EA 95-297 AND DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-019 FOR A 100-FOOT TALL MONOPOLE WITH THREE CELLULAR-ANTENNA ARRAYS, THREE MICROWAVE-DISH ANTENNAS, AND EQUIPMENT BUILDING. APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, recommended that this matter be continued until August 1, 1995. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to continue the appeal by AirTouch Cellular to August 1, 1995. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-152. 2. WEED ABATEMENTS/LOT CLEANINGS AND PLACEMENT OF COSTS ON THE 1995/96 TAX ROLLS. a. Archer, Cecil M. & Leta N. APN 774-033-025 $ 687.50 b. Chaney, Victoria APN 769-115-016 $1,100.00 C. Chariton, Scott A. & Jean APN 769-116-011 $ 187.50 d. Cooper, Charles & Norma APN 773-264-017 $ 187.50 e. Dalton, Richard A. APN 773-253-005 APN 773-253-006 $ 500.00 f. Ervin, La F. APN 774-072-013 $ 187.50 g. Collins Dorothy APN 769-1154)15 $1,100.00 h. Greenthunib Gardening APN 774-155-017 APN 774-155-018 APN 774-155-019 $1,375.00 I. Pasarell, Shireen APN 774-2134)01 APN 774-2134)02 APN 774-213-003 APN 774-2134)04 $ 750.00 j. Patton, James J. & Eileen APN 773-275-016 $ 187.50 k. Raven, Harry & Dorothy APN 774-123-006 $ 187.50 I. Stokes, F. J. APN 774-072-002 $ 187.50 Mr. Hartung, Building & Safety Director, advised that payments have been received for Items i, and I and he recommended adoption of the amended resolution. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 18 July 18, 1995 RESOLUTION NO.95-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ASSESSING LIEN AND PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION ON TAX ROLLS ON CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR COSTS OF ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE. It was moved by Council Members SnifflCathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-58 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. 3. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 95-046 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LA QUINTA MNNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NEW CHAPTER 9.80 AND AMENDING CHAPTER 9.154 TO ADULT ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESSES. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that in 1992, Council adopted Ordinance No.215 which created Chapter 9.154 of the L? Quinta Municipal Code and required adult entertainment businesses to obtain approval of a conditional use permit. It also created an overlay zone of 600 feet on the north and south sides of Highway 111 for such businesses. The Council received many community concerns regarding that ordinance and as a result, Urgency Ordinance No.267 was adopted on June 20, 1995 and is effective for 45 days. It created required distances from certain types of establishments such as schools, parks, and churches. Since that date, staff has reviewed land-use studies concerning the secondary effects of sexually-oriented businesses. The Planning Commission reviewed the urgency ordinance on July 11th and survey comments received from the business community on how they feel that sexually-oriented businesses would affect their businesses. He reviewed the Planning Commission's recommended changes as follows: increase the distance requirement from parks, recreation areas, and public buildings to 1,500 feet; increase the distance requirement from religious institutions to 1,000 feet; increase the distance requirement from businesses serving on- premise alcoholic beverages to 750 feet; increase the space between sexually-oriented businesses to 750 feet; create a new distance for family-oriented" restaurants of 750 feet; and eliminate the entrance restriction by allowing the entrance to face a major, primary, or secondary thoroughfare. He advised that family-oriented businesses are defined as restaurants that cater to youth, having promotional activities, children's menus, play areas, etc. He advised that staff was also directed by the Planning Commission to include Ms. Holgate's concerns wherever legally possible. He advised that the ordinance is in legislative form for Council's review to better define the changes that have been made and the survey responses are included in the staff report. He advised that Special Counsel, Mr. Jeffrey Goldfarb was present to assist in addressing any legal questions. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 19 July 18, 995 Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, recommended some additional modifications. She referred to Section 5.80.020 regarding the definition of adult theaters" and recommended the reinstatement of the original language. In that same section she also recommended a change to Subsection h. to include or are minimally covered with devices commonly referred to as pasties and G-strings or equivalent clothing." She advised that additional definitions of pasties and 1-strings would also be included. Council Member Perkins believed that the ordinance is as restrictive as possible without jeopardizing it. Ms. Honeywell advised that it wasn't known at the time how the Planning Commission's recommended changes to the distance requirements would affect the humber of available locations, therefore, that was their bare recommendation. She advised that the more available locations provided for sexually-oriented businesses, the easier it is to defend the ordinance. Mr. Jeffrey Goldfarb, 611 Anton Blvd., Costa Mesa, legal counsel with Rutan & Tucker, advised that the courts require alternative avenues of communication. Re advised that the City has five, at best, available locations for sexually-oriented businesses which is considered a small number of alternative avenues of communications as far as case law is concerned. He couldn't say that's sufficient or insufficient, but advised that four available locations has never been upheld in court. He felt that a small number of locations would place the City at the bottom of the spectrum. Council Member Perkins asked if counsel was comfortable with the Planning Commission's recommendations. Mr. Goldfarb advised that he's not particularly comfortable regarding their recommendations because insufficient locations" is always used as the challenge. Re felt that such a low number of available locations would be pushing it. He pointed Qut how locations could end up being eliminated by the presence of another sexually-oriented business or the placement of other establishments that have distance requirements. Mayor Pena asked what would happen if available locations are eliminated by the presence of another sexually-oriented business and would another such business be precluded from the market. Mr. Goldfarb advised that the courts look at the number of available locations at that time and determine if that number is sufficient. They take other factors into consideration as well, such as long-term leases, the size of the City, and business demand. Re advised that the courts would look at the number of such businesses in the City and at some point, determine that the City has taken its regional fair share of sexually-oriented businesses. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 20 July 18, 1995 Mayor Pena asked if the courts look at sexually-oriented businesses on a regional basis or city by city. Mr. Goldfarb advised that the courts haven't yet viewed it on a regional standpoint. Mayor Pena suggested that a regional approach to sexually-oriented businesses, similar to transportation and housing, might be a consideration to pursue before a regional body. Mr. Goldfarb felt that it's an interesting approach, but was unaware of any court case that had been analyzed in that manner. He advised that the United States Supreme Court has been willing to consider the secondary effects of such businesses and are seriously considering the steps taken by the cities to deal with them. He felt that perhaps the courts would be willing to accept a regional approach in the future. Council Member Perkins advised that this community like others, is totally against such businesses and asked counsel to explain why the City can't deny them. Mr. Goldfarb advised that any type of adult entertainment that is presented visually or written is considered speech by the courts and although it's the least protected, it is protected by the First Amendment and must be allowed. However, the courts do allow cities to regulate such businesses in an attempt to diminish or eliminate the secondary effects they have on the community which is the purpose of this ordinance. Council Member Perkins asked if the ordinance could be amended later to allow additional locations if the ordinance be challenged. Mr. Goldfarb advised that it could. However, the business making the challenge would probably be allowed to locate their particular establishment because it would become a legal non-conforming use. Council Member Bangerter asked if any current movement or appeal is in process in an attempt to remove this type of business from free speech. Mr. Goldfarb advised of a court case regarding nude dancing where one of several judges on the winning side of the case stated that it's strictly a commercial enterprise and that nudity is not speech. He advised that, although the judge's opinion doesn't carry any legal weight, there seems to be a move by the courts to provide less protection for these businesses because people are tired of seeing blight in their neighborhoods. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, asked if the balance of the ordinance would apply to a business that was determined to be a legal non-conforming use by the courts. Mr. Goldfarb felt that the courts would determine that all facets of the ordinance would apply except the locational aspects. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 21 July 18, 1995 In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Goldfarb was unaware of any case where either four or five locations prevailed in a court case, but he's seen where four was not upheld. Mayor Pena asked if there were other points in the ordinance that might be challenged. Mr. Goldfarb advised that the number of available locations is the usual challenge, but more specific regulations such as the ban on nudity would probably be secondary reasons for challenges. He advised that the ban on nudity is a likely area for challenge because it's a new area of the law that's currently expanding. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. Mr. Paul Quill, 51-245 Avenida Rubio, felt that it's important for the ordinance to be as tight as possible. He believed that La Quinta is a unique, residential community and the City should let the ordinance be challenged. in court if necessary. He felt that it's unbelievable that such businesses could fall under the rights of the First Amendment and urged the Council to approve the recommendations submitted by the Planning Commission. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, was pleased with the Planning Commission's recommendations and agreed with Mr. Quill's statement that it should be a tight ordinance. He urged the Council to not try to second guess the future and water-down the ordinance, but adopt the most restrictive ordinance possible. Mr. Robert Metkus, stated that Palm Springs only had two sexually-oriented businesses a few years ago and now they have twenty-two. He was in favor of adopting a strong ordinance, even to the point of risking a lawsuit. Ms. Lee Merryman, 51-345 Avenida Rubio, concurred with previous speakers and suggested adding more parks and only allow sexually-oriented businesses in rural areas such as Airport Boulevard. Mayor Pena advised that the courts wouldn't look favorable upon the appearance that the City is trying to prohibit such businesses through land-use zoning. Ms. Merryman wasn't afraid of the City being challenged because she felt that it's an important issue. Ms. Laurie Shields, 78-185 Sonesta Way, read a statement from Connie Baty, the spokesperson for Citizens for a Quality Community, stating that they support adoption of the revised ordinance with the understanding that the residents expect the Council to continue looking for options that will preserve the quality of the community. She urged the Council to help protect children from this type of business. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 22 July 18, 1995 Ms. Karen Holgate, 45-865 Pawnee, Indian Wells, Executor Director of HOPE, wished to clarify that the City of Palm Springs has 22 available locations, but not nearly that many sexually-oriented businesses. She expressed appreciation to the City Attorney for her cooperative manner in working with the public on this issue, She advised that the State is being inundated with sexually-oriented businesses and the people dealing with this issue feel that ordinances should be consistent and uniform throughout the State so that it can be better defended. She pointed out that Cathedral City's ordinance is being challenged on two words, regular features." In reference to Section 5.80.060 Q) of the ordinance, she suggested the inclusion of two years for a misdemeanor conviction, five years for a felony conviction, or five years for two or mbre misdemeanor convictions, noting that five years for a felony conviction has been upheld in the courts. She suggested that Section 5.80.060 CC) include the prohibition of tips and gratuities. She advised that some of the other cities are considering it a misdemeanor to violate a sexually-oriented business permit. She further suggested the following inclusions: the listing of a judicial review process, a provision for suspensions before revoking the license, and clearer definitions for denials. She reiterated her concern regarding the consistency of the ordinances in the State and advised that a group is working with the League of California Cities on this issue. Mayor Pena advised that one of the problems with this issue is that there's no clear direction by the courts. Ms. Holgate advised that the League of California Cities' legal counsel is trying to assist with the introduction of new legislation next year. In response to Mayor Pena, Ms. Rolgate advised that a regional approach was suggested and tried previously, but failed because the cities in the valley have varying opinions on this issue. She advised that some of the cities with a low number of available locations plan to use the regional approach to defend their ordinance if they're challenged, based on.the amount of residential areas.. Mayor Pena suggested that the cities could share information on a regional basis through the Public Safety Committee at CVAG. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell clarified that misdemeanor convictions referred to earlier are sexually-related convictions only. Ms. Terry Henderson, 54-711 Eisenhower Drive, supported the five-year and two-year convictions as related by Ms. Rolgate. There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 23 July 18, 1995 Council Member Bangerter asked if prohibition of tipping entertainers was included in the current ordinance. Mr. Goldfarb advised that prohibition of direct tipping could be included in the ordinance, but its purpose would be to prevent physical contact which is already prohibited by creating a six-foot buffer zone between the performer and the patrons. He further advised that it would be enforced through some type of policing much like other City regulations are enforced. Council Member Bangerter asked if tips could be prohibited altogether in sexually- oriented businesses. Mr. Goldfarb advised that the courts allow regulations for the purpose of eliminating secondary effects of which tipping is not. Mayor Pena referred to Section 5.80.060 Z) and advised that direct tipping would be prohibited if a solid plex i-glass barrier was required within the six-foot buffer zone and asked if that could be included in the ordinance. Mr. Goldfarb advised that both could be required, but it might require an explanation as to why a six-foot buffer zone is necessary if a solid barrier is present. Mayor Peha suggested that the buffer zone could be reduced to three feet and he felt that safety would be sufficient reason for requiring both. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Goldfarb advised that indirect physical contact is included in Section 5.80.060 CC) to prohibit a patron from passing a tip from his/her person to the performer's person without actually touching the body. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Goldfarb advised that an adult entertainer" is defined in the ordinance as a person who engages in sexually-oriented entertainment and minors are prohibited as patrons or performers. Council Member Perkins felt that some of the public comments should be considered for inclusion in the ordinance and said that it's probably as strict as would be allowed. He was in support of adopting a tight ordinance and willing to risk a challenge in court. Council Member Sniff advised that ordinances are always challengeable and felt that this one should be as tough as possible. He supported Ms. Holgate's suggestion regarding the convictions for misdemeanors and felonies. Ms. Honeywell didn't have a major problem with Ms. Holgate's suggestions. She referred to Ms. Holgate's suggestion regarding license suspensions and advised that such a provision would make the City's ordinance a little easier," but Ms. Holgate's idea was BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 24 July 18, 1995 that it would make it more defensible. She deferred to Mr. Goldfarb for further comments on the recommended amendments. Council Member Sniff wished to hear Mr. Goldfarb's comments also on the distance requirements recommended by the Planning Commission. In regard to license suspensions, Mr. Goldfarb advised that a broad range of decisions exist by the courts about when someone's license may be revoked. He believed that a suspension tied to the number of violations as opposed to the type of violation would be more defensible because suspension for violations themselves would have to be defined very specifically in the ordinance as to which violations result in a suspension and which ones result in a revocation of the license. He advised that it made sense to tie the suspension to the first violation. Ms. Honeywell advised that a such a provision is not currently in the ordinance, but it would make the ordinance easier to defend. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Goldfarb advised that there's no requirement to list the judicial review process in the ordinance, but it can be included. Ms. Honeywell advised that the ordinance allows for an appeal to the City Manager for any revocation of a license and such an appeal would be the final city level" review. However, the City has no power to prevent anyone from seeking a judicial review and she felt that including it in the ordinance would be confusing. Council Member Cathcart felt that the ordinance should be as strict as possible within reason, noting that there's no reason to include a regulation that's certain to be overturned. He felt that it's time to push the envelope" and even make the ordinance stricter as new court precedents are set. He was very comfortable with the ordinance and the amendments that have been discussed and wished to see it go forward. Council Member Bangerter concurred. Mayor Pena expressed appreciation to the public for their input on this issue. Mr. Goldfarb advised that court decisions regarding misdemeanor and felony convictions are widely varied, but had no problem with including Ms. Holgate's suggestion regarding the two and five-year convictions. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Goldfarb advised that an ordinance can be challenged in either Federal or State Court. The decisions made in Federal Court vary from judge to judge, but regulations that are based on the elimination of secondary effects are usually upheld in court. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 25 July 18, 1995 Ms. Honeywell confirmed the addition of a suspension clause in the ordinance and the inclusion of a two-year misdemeanor conviction, five-year felony conviction, and five years for two or more misdemeanor convictions. She suggested that the buffer zone be eliminated if a floor-to-ceiling barrier was required. Mayor Pena wished to make the ordinance as tough as possible and include the buffer zone. Mr. Goldfarb advised that safety concerns could be used as the rationale for requiring both a buffer zone and barrier. Ms. Honeywell advised that the suggested amendments to the ordinance would be made, including the two she recommended regarding Section 5.80.020 see Page 19). Mayor Pena advised that additional amendments could be made in the future as needed. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff?Cathcart to take up Ordinance No. 270 as amended by title and number only and waive further reading. ORDINANCE NO.270 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, REVOKING ORDINANCE 267 AND ADOPTING A REVISED NEW CIIAPTER 5.80 TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, AMENDING CHAITER 9.154, TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Ordinance No. 270 as amended. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Peha NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 4. TENTATIVE TRACT 28189, CHANGE OF ZONE 95-078, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-005 TO CREATE 11 RESIDENTIAL LOTS FROM 6 EXISTING LOTS AT THE QUARRY. APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT. The staff report is on file in the City Clerk's Office. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 26 July 18, 1995 RESOLUTION NO.95-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-299 PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 28189 AND CHANGE OF ZONE 95-078. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-59 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to take up Ordinance No. 271 by title and number only and waive further reading. ORDINANCE NO.271 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY REFERRED TO IN CHANGE OF ZONE 95- 078. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to introduce Ordinance No.271 on first reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO.95-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ELIMINATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 934)05 AS IT PERTAINS TO TENTATIVE TRACT 28189 AND CHANGE OF ZONE 95-078. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No.95-60 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO.9541 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 28189 TO CREATE 11 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AT THE QUARRY. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No.95-61 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 27 July 18, 1995 5. TENTATIVE TRACT 28150 TO SUBDIVIDE 3.6 ACRES INTO 14 SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS AND ONE RECREATION LOT LOCATED ON LOT 5, TRACT 25499-3 WITHIN PGA WEST. APPLICANT: KSL LAND CORPORATION. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that on May 16, 1995, the Council, at the request of the applicant, referred this matter back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved the project on June 13, 1995 without any change to the conditions of approval. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.95-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 28150 TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF A LAND SALES SUBDIVISION AT PGA WEST. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to adopt Resolution No.95-62 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE LA OUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB BUILDING HORIZONS DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB AND THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. Council Member Bangerter abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the amendment provides for a reduction in the down payment from 10% to 3%, it increases the Agency's funding for the Second Trust Deed loan from $12,000 to $20,000 per unit, and it allows flexibility for the billing of expenses to be reimbursed if the total allocation for reimbursement does not exceed $85,000 per unit. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 28 July 18, 1995 In response to Council Member Cathcart, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that the allowance is for a down payment of 3%, but they can put more in their down payment if they wish. Council Member Perkins suggested that it be reworded to read reduce the down payment to a minimum of 3%. Council concurred. Council Member Cathcart suggested that the wording regarding the funding for the Second Trust Deed loan read not more than $20,000 per unit." Council concurred. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.9543 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND BUILDING HORIZONS. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No. 95?63 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member Bangerter ABSENT. Council recessed to the Financing Authority. Council reconvened. STUDY SESSION.................continued 2. CALLE KALIMA/AVENIDA LA FONDA INTERSECTION DISCUSSION. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the purpose of creating a cul-de-sac was to control the traffic better at that intersection. He advised that it's primarily a problem for drivers exiting Washington Street onto Avenida La Fonda and didn't feel that right-turn-only signs would help the problem. Re advised that traffic problems are expected to happen as the area begins to BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 29 July 18, 1995 develop and staff wishes to try to address those problems during the street design work of that area. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that staff would begin discussions with property owners if one of the options is acceptable to Council. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper advised that the engineering work would begin in three to four months. He felt that would allow sufficient time for staff to complete discussions with the property owners and not require much staff time. Council Member Cathcart felt that Option 2 was better. Council concurred. 3. PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED MEDIAN LANDSCAPE CONCEPT FOR WASHINGTON STREET NEAR HIGHWAY 111. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, presented conceptual drawings for the proposed permanent median landscaping at Washington Street and Highway 111 as well as the proposed temporary improvements that will exist until the final widening phase is completed. He advised that the landscaping would be less expensive and low- maintenance by using Palm Springs Gold and desert-oriented shrubbery. He advised that the temporary improvements would be easily converted when the permanent median landscaping is installed. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the trees couldn't be kept in their original containers because the roots would outgrow their environment. Mayor Pena asked when the construction would begin. Mr. Cosper advised?that the temporary improvements would begin in November, 1995, and the widening-construction would begin late next summer. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that use of Palm Springs Gold is good for weed and blow-sand control. Council Member Perkins suggested moving the three-point reflectors back a few feet to keep cars from running into them. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the same type of landscape design would be used along Washington Street and Eisenhower Drive. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 30 July 18, 995 Council Member Perkins suggested planting the plants asymmetrically rather than in a straight line. Council Member Cathcart concurred. Council Member Sniff felt that all landscape improvements should be installed in a manner that wouldn't be disrupted by future additions or improvements. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, questioned why new medians are being built and landscaped when medians already constructed remain unlandscaped. Mr. Cosper advised that the City would be reimbursed for the costs of these medians through a Development Agreement. Mayor Pena advised that he would send a letter to Assemblyman Battin regarding CalTrans and the amount of time it's taken to get this project started and request his assistance in getting it expedited. Mr. Cosper advised that the temporary improvements can be handled through a shorter, encroachment process since it's under $1 million. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS All reports were noted and filed. DEPARTMENT REPORTS None MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEM Council Meinber Bangerter felt that some of the concerns that Judy Vossler addressed in her letter should be looked into. In regard to the position of the podium, Mayor Pena advised that speakers tended to address the audience when the podium was at an angle before and that's why the decision was made to position it as it is. Council Member Bangerter felt that it's intimidating for the speaker to have his/her back to the audience. Council Member Perkins concurred. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 31 July iS, 1995 Council Member Bangerter felt that the main entrance problem should be considered, along with the suggestion of having a volunteer available from the Volunteer Program to assist the public as they enter the Chamber. 2. Mayor Pena wished to have an update on the Materials Recovery Facility MRF). Council Member Sniff suggested that Mr. Baker, Principal Planner and MRF Task Force Staff Representative, give that update at the next meeting. Council concurred. Mayor Pena suggested that Reports of Action from the Planning Commission be placed on the agenda as Consent Calendar items to streamline the agenda. Council Member Sniff didn't have a problem with it, but was concerned about too many items being placed on the Consent Calendar and hoped that wouldn't happen. Council concurred. Mayor Peija urged staff to begin weeding out out-dated ordinances. Council recessed to Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION I. Conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(B) one case). Council reconvened with no decision heing made which requires reporting pursuant to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code Brown Act). There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. UNDRA L. J? OLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:28:22AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 07-U02 18-U02 95-U02