Loading...
1995 09 19 CC MinutesD La QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 19, 1995 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on September 19, 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 AGFNDA Mr. Genovese, City Manager, requested that Business Session Item No.4 be removed from the agenda, advising that it would be rescheduled for a future meeting. Council Member Cathcart advised that he wished to add another item for discussion under Mayor & Council Members' Items. APPROVAL OF MINUThS MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of August 1, August 15, and September 5, 1995 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously None Ms. Lucia Moran P 0 Box 1305, presented a plaque to the City for their participation in the 1st Annual Soap Box Derby in March and announced that the 2nd Annual Soap Box Derby would be held in March, 1996. PUBLIC COMNfENT Mr. Merle Schoelkoph, 53-655 Avenida Carranza, asked if the City planned to install speed bumps on the streets in the Cove to slow down the speeding traffic. Mayor Pena advised that speed bumps aren't allowed on public streets, but the Council would forward his concern to the Sheriff?s Office. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 2 September 19, t995 Mr. Wally Reynolds, 79-860 Fiesta Drive, felt that more care should be taken in keeping the brush and debris cleared along Jefferson Street. Council referred the matter to staff. Mr. Jack Sobelman, 52-815 Avenida Martinez, spoke regarding the traffic in the Cove and said that too many people roll through intersections instead of making complete stops. He felt that the police reports warrant additional patrol officers. A LETTER FROM LA QUINTA SCULPTURE PARK REGARDING CONTRACT FOR TRASH PICKUP. Ms. Deborah McGarrey, 79-645 Camelback, Bermuda Dunes, Customer Service Representative of Waste Management of the Desert, felt that the letter was misleading. She advised that Waste Management serviced the La Quinta Sculpture Park prior to their annexation, but cancelled service to them because of payment problems and that's when they sought service elsewhere. Council referred the matter to staff. B. LETTER FROM CITY OF HOPE REQUESTING A CONTRIBUTION. Council Member Sniff suggested that this matter be placed on the next agenda for discussion. Council concurred. C. LETTER FROM BOYS & GIRLS CLUB REGARDING PRESENTATION RELATIVE TO OPERATIONS OF THEIR LA QUINTA FACILITY. Mr. J0hn Foster, 78-234 Hacienda, President of Boys & Girls Club Foundation, advised that 75% of the $2 million invested in the La. Quinta facility came from outside of the City of La Quinta. He advised that they recently increased yearly membership dues from $5 BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 3 September 19, 1995 to $120 because 6f increased costs. They are interested in creating a better relationship with the City and try to find a way in which the City can be a bigger participant. Council directed staff to schedule a Study Session presentation as soon as possible. D. LETTER OF RESIGNATION FROM DREW PALLETTE FROM THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION. Council accepted Mr. Pallette?s resignation and asked the City Clerk to send him a letter of appreciation and to recruit for a replacement. BUSINESS SESSION CONS?E?ON OF FRITZ BURNS PARK POOL FACILITY AS DEFINED IN THE COMPROMISE PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL AS A STUDY SESSION ITEM AT ITS 3ULY 5, 1995 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Mayor Pen a abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, outlined the proposal presented to Council on July 5th regarding the operation of the pool by Coachella Valley Recreation & Park District CVRPD). He advised that the proposal was based on a downsized pool and aquatics building with all competitive-aspects of the pool removed as well as the tot pool and waterslide. The proposed operation hours would be eight hours a day, seven days a week, April to August and would include such programs as general swim, limited competition swim, lap swim, swim lessons, night swim, and vide6s. The 25-year lease between the City and CVRPD calls for the City to pay an annual subsidy of $27,500 for maintenance and operation of the pool with a yearly reduction of $1,485 for 18 years. Long-term maintenance costs would be equally shared and CVRPD would keep all gate, program, and concession proceeds. The pool construction would begin in April, 1996 and open for operation in August, 1996 if approved at this meeting. Under the CVRPD proposal, the redesign of the pool will reduce the construction costs by an estimated $339,000 and will reduce the maintenance and operation by $129,000 to $156,000 by year eighteen. Mr. Cosper then proeeeded to review the alternatives available to the Council as follows: t. Direct staff to proceed with the Fritz Burns Pool Facility as designed and negotiate a Cooperative Agreement with CVRPD for the operation and maintenance of the Fritz Burns Pool to be considered by the City Council. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 4 September 19,1995 2. Direct staff to proceed with the redesign of the Fritz Burns Pool for a not-to-exceed total cost of $1,400,000 and negotiate a Cooperative Agreement with CVRPD for the operation and maintenance of the Fritz Burns Pool to be considered by the City Council. 3. Direct staff to stop all further actions related to the Fritz Burns Pool development. 4. Provide staff with alternate direction. The following people spoke in support of the pool: Ms. Kay Wolff 77-227 Calle Ensenada Ms. Danella Rogers 52-811 Avenida Mendoza Ms. Trice Healy 54-455 Eisenhower Drive Mr. Carl Ingram 78-625 Sanita Drive Ms. Lameka Ingram 78-625 Sanita Drive Ms. Georgiana Maupin 54-605 Avenida Juarez Mr. Fred Wolff 77-227 Calle Ensenada Mr. Newell Ackerson 46-855 Highland Palms Ms. Candace Smith 54-705 Avenida Carranza Mr. Jeff Soinmers 53-460 Avenida Juarez Ms. Kate Kelly 78-565 Sagebrush Avenue Mr. Nathan Sonunem 53-460 Avenida Juarez Ms. Tina Zavala 53-680 Eisenhower Drive Ms. Liz Salgado 53-645 Avenida Navarro Mr. Michael Head 77-625 Calle Ridalgo Ms. Val Smith 54-631 Avenida Alvarado Mr. Jeff Smith 54-631 Avenida Alvarado Mr. Roger Barr 52-720 Avenida Carranza Mr. Ted Hart 54-595 Avenida Rubio Mr. Patrick Healy 54-455 Eisenhower Drive Mr. James Porras 47-395 Monroe Street, Indio Ms. Susan Benay 53-686 Avenida Velasco The following people spoke in opposition to the pool: Ms. Lora Sohelman 52-815 Avenida Mendoza Mr. Robert Tyler 44-215 Villeta Drive Mr. Jack Sobelman 52-815 Avenida Mendoza Ms. Terry Henderson 54-711 Eisenhower Drive Mr. Peter Platamone 79-575 Marigold Lane Mr. Martin Close 79-885 Horseshoe Road BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 5 September 19, 1995 Mr. V. K. Embery 54-965 Avenida Vallejo Dr. Jack Wilson 53-960 Avenida Montezuma Mr. Wally Reynolds 79-860 Fiesta Drive Ms. Joyce Sivley 79-775 Westward Ho Drive Mr. Robert Metkus La Quinta Highlands Dr. Morrie Brandinan 53-200 Avenida Mendoza Mr. Gary Tomak 54-991 Tanglewood Ms. Helen Glacy 51-825 Avenida Martinez Mr. Arthur Carducci, 52-333 Avenida Bermudas, was concerned about how close the pool would be to the tennis courts. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter asked if there would be an increase in taxes if CVRPD's proposal is accepted. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that no assessment to residents is anticipated. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Genovese advised that CVRPD's services in Ia are funded through property taxes and a $9.90 yearly assessment to property owners. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that CVRPD hasn't indicated any anticipated increase in their assessment due to the operation of the pool. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper confirmed that the proposed subsidy reduction is based on anticipated growth in the community that would generate additional revenue from the existing assessment. If there are no new houses the City would not see reduction in the subsidy in subsequent years. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney? advised that insurance liability hasn't been discussed with CVRPD, but anticipated that they would want an arrangement that is similar to their other facilities. The City's agreement with the Joint Powers Insurance Authority would cover the pool if the City is liable. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Genovese advised that a portion of CVRPD's property tax allocation was taken by the State last year and that's why they implemented an assessment. Council Member Cathcart pointed out that the assessment could increase if the State takes more of their tax allocation in the future. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that CVRPD can raise their assessment without the consent of the City. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 6 September 19, 1995 In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that all year-round maintenance costs would be the responsibility of CVRPD under the proposed agreement. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Catheart/Perkins to direct staff to proceed with the Fritz Burns pool facility as originally designed and presented to the City Council at its meeting of December 20, 1994 and to proceed with plans for the operation and maintenance to be done by City staff as presented on December 20, 1994. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Cosper advised that the estimated construction cost of the pool as proposed on December 20, 1994 is $1.7 million and the year-round operational costs are $241,000. Council Member Perkins felt that the Council has a fiscal responsibility to the City and that the reserve fund is not sufficient should a major disaster occur. Re felt that the City was in a better financial position when it built the Civic Center and Senior Center and pointed Out that a lot of money was lost in the Wymer deal. He had agreed to consider the pool if maintenance costs were reduced, but it was based on a five-month operation, not twelve months. Re felt that the City should reduce its financial support to the various organizations it supports each year. Re advised that he would vote NO on the motion based on his belief that the Council must closely examine how the City's money is spent. Council Member Sniff advised that he no longer supported the proposal made last December because the compromise CVRPD proposal) is a better alternative. He preferred staff's recommended Alternative #2. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter reviewed staff's recommended alternatives and questioned the motion on the floor as she felt that Alternative #3 would be the proper action to take for any Council Member that wished to bring action on the pool to a stop, pointing Out that the present motion was not included as a recommendation in the staff report. Ms. Honeywell advised that she didn't know the intent behind the motion, but staff's recommended alternatives do not limit the Council's options. Motion failed with Council Members Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, and Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter voting NO and with Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-164. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Cathcart/Perkins to direct staff to proceed with the Fritz Burns pool facility as originally designed and to negotiate a Cooperative Agreement. with CVRPD for the operation and maintenance as outlined in their proposal submitted to the City Council at its meeting of July 5, 1995. Council Member Perkins advised that he would vote NO for the same reason that he voted NO on the previous motion. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 7 September 19, 1995 Council Member Sniff advised that he couldnt support the motion. Motion failed with Council Members Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, and Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter voting NO and with Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-165. Council Member Sniff expressed appreciation to the audience for their input on the issue. He supported Alternative #2 because he felt that it would put the City forward on a final decision and was the logical compromise. He believed that it made sense for the pool to be operated by CVRPD. He pointed out that Alternative #2 proposes a diminishing subsidy to cover maintenance and operation costs, limits the construction costs to $L.4 million, and opens the way to re-allocate $339,000 for other projects. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter felt that most of those present knew why she supported the pool and she reaffirmed her commitment to that effort. She was disappointed in the present outcome of the proposed compromise, pointing out that a lot of work had gone into it. Council Member Cathcart felt responsible for the proposed compromise and has researched and listened to both sides of the issue. He didn't believe that the pool would reduce crime, pointing Out that the lowest crime months are June and July. He was disappointed with a five-month operation period and felt that a vote for the pool versus other recreational possibilities is a feel good" vote and not a responsible one. Council Member Sniff pointed out that Alternative #2 is a direction to staff to negotiate an agreement with CVRPD and then the agreement would be brought back to the Council for approval. Council Member Cathcart pointed out that Alternative #2 also approves an expenditure of funds for redesign of the pool. Mr. Genovese advised that any unapproved expenditures would have to be brought back to the Council for approval. Council Member Cathcart hoped that the proponents of the pool n't really feel that the City has failed to do anything for the youth because he felt that was untrue. Council Member Sniff advised that the City has provided many things for the community such as: land and funds for the YMCA Childcare Center, land and funds for the Boys & Girls Club, the Senior Center, the Sports Complex, and a multi-purpose room and amphitheater at La Quinta Middle School. He hoped that the City would continue to provide for the community in a thoughtful, reasonable, and fiscally-responsible manner. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 8 September 19,1995 Council Member Cathcart thanked the staff for their hard work on this project and to CVRPD for their proposal. He hoped that this would be the beginning of a better relationship between the City and CVRPD. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter Mr. Cosper advised that he didn't know what the additional operational costs would be if the operation period was extended to seven months, but there would be no increase in maintenance costs. Council Member Perkins pointed out that most of the items the City has provided to the community as mentioned by Council Member Sniff are directed toward the youth. However, he felt that those days are gone and that the City has to take better care of its money. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter agreed that the City must take care of its money, but hoped that those days are not gone. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to direct staff to negotiate a Cooperative Agreement with CVRPD for the operation and maintenance of the Fritz Burns pool and pending results of that, to move forward with a redesign of the Fritz Burns pool for a not-to-exceed total cost of $1,400,000. Council Member Perkins questioned how a Cooperative Agreement could be negotiated without the details of the pool redesign. Council Member Sniff felt that details of the Cooperative Agreement should be worked Out before spending money for redesign of the pool. Mr. Genovese advised that an agreement negotiated in the absence of a final design would have to be brought back to the Council. Motion failed with Council Members Catheart and Perkins voting NO and with Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-166. Council Member Perkins requested that Business Session Item No.3 be taken up at this time. 3. CONSIDERATION OF COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY? CONCERTS ASSOCIATION SERVICE CONTRACT. Ms. Nicholson, Parks & Recreation Director, advised that Coachella Valley Community Concerts Association CVCCA) is requesting implementation of a service contract in the amount of $10,000. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 9 September 19, 1995 Council Member Perkins advised that he's going to be recommending that all funding requests be reduced by 10%. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Bangerter to authorize funding in the amount of $9,000 for CVCCA from the Special Project Contingency Account 101- 101-663-000) and direct the City Attorney to prepare the applicable contract services agreement and authorize execution of the agreement by the Mayor. Council Member Sniff supports CVCCA, but felt that a $9,000 contribution would be excessive. He believed that the Council? had previously discussed limiting it to $5,000. Mr. Richard Mayer, 48- 18 Vista Cielo, Vice-President and Treasurer of CVCCA, gave a brief history of the organization and advised that all of their staff are volunteers. They hold their concerts at the Sun City clubhouse and propose to increase their revenues through concerts, advertising in their printed program, and a fundraising luncheon on November 4th. They experienced a shortfall last season due to the limited-seating capacity at their present venue and, therefore, are requesting financial assistance from the City to sustain the association until they can obtain a larger venue which they believe will increase their subscription memberships. They hope to have the new La Quinta Hotel ballroom as their new venue for the 1996/97 season. Mayor Pena asked if this was a grant request or a service contract, pointing Out that no services are outlined in the staff report. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the services related in CVCCA's letter to the Council would be outlined as the services in a contract if they meet the Council's approval and that the contract can be brought back to Council for review prior to its execution. Mayor Pena advised that he supports CVCCA, but wished to see what services would be included, such as scholarships, music lessons, etc. Mr. Mayer advised that CVCCA holds concerts in the schools and the association's subscription memberships are the base from which their outreach programs are funded, but they need financial assistance to maintain that base. Council Member Perkins was viewing it as a one-year grant. Council Member Sniff felt more comfortable with Option #2 that would allow the City Attorney to draft a service contract for Council's review. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that it would be necessary to determine what services would be funded through the contract before a draft could be prepared. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 10 September 19, 1995 Mayor Pena wished to see a budget for the proposed funding. Mr. Genovese advised that staff would meet with CVCCA and determine what services they wish to provide to the City for this funding. Mayor Pena asked if the school district's help had been requested, suggesting that the City might be able to match funds with them. Mr. Mayer advised that they didn't ask the school district for help because they don't have a music budget. Motion was withdrawn. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Sniff to direct the City Attorney and staff to prepare an applicable contract for services or a grant agreement for consideration by Council at the earliest possible meeting not to exceed $9,000). Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-167. Council recessed until 7:00 p.m. 7:00P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Harry Loukatos, 77-625 California Drive, Palm Desert, advised that he's farmed the Kanlian property for three years and tries to be courteous in his farming. The adjacent property owners, Mr. & Mrs. Reese, board horses and give riding lessons. He believes that they are responsible for cutting his fence to access the KSL property by horseback which exposes him to a liability. He has asked them to refrain from crossing the Kanlian property, but with no favorable outcome. Their equestrian use also creates dust which is a problem for his flower farming because it depends so much on the cosmetic aspect. Mr. Sonny Kanlian, 50-400 Jefferson Street, advised that he urged the Council to deny an equestrian-overlay zoning for the property owned by Mr. & Mrs. Reese when it came before the Council two years ago, but failed. He now stands in danger of losing his liability insurance coverage because of vandalism and trespassing by horseback riders on his property. He referred to sheriff's reports and pictures taken of the vandal isms and questioned the allowed use of an arena area next to his property as a corral. He asked the Council to consider amending the equestrian- overlay zoning on the Reese's property. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 11 September 19, 1995 Mr. Mike Reeske, 54415 Avenida Vallejo, representing his in-laws, Mr. & Mrs. Reese, advised that they are on vacation, but are anxious to respond to each of Mr. Kanlian's allegations. Mayor Pena asked staff to review this matter and report back to Council as soon as possible. Council Member Perkins felt that an investigation into this matter should rely heavily upon the sheriff's office and any violations should be handled by them. Mayor Pena advised that the Council can review zoning and land-use violations, but they don't get involved with civil matters. Council Member Cathcart wished to look at the equestrian-overlay zoning again to address any loop-holes that might exist in the zoning. Ms. Lucia Moran, P.O. Box 1305, Director of the Soap Box Derby, advised that a formal request has been submitted to the Parks & Recreation Department for the City's participation as a sponsor in the 2nd Annual Soap Box Derby in March, 1996 and hoped that it would be agendized for the next meeting. PKESENIAII()N? None PUB! IC HEARINGS 1. CONTINUATION OF APPEAL BY THE APPLICANT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION D?IIAL OF CERTIFICATION OF EA NO.95-297 AND DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.95-019 FOR A 100-FOOT TALL MONOPOLE WITH THREE CELLULAR-ANTENNA ARRAYS, THREE MICROWAVE-DISH ANTENNAS, AND AN EQUIPMENT BUILDING. APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that this public hearing is continued from August 1st and is a request by AirTouch Cellular to locate a monopole and equipment building at the Sports Complex. On August 1st, the Council directed staff to address the following issues: a letter of concern from Mr. Ministrelli, results of the Musco Lighting Study, health concerns related to the monopole, and the radio-engineering study prepared by AirTouch. He advised that the Musco Lighting Study would be addressed during Study Session Item No.2. The health concerns were addressed when the ordinance was adopted as well as during a previous application by PacTel for a monopole at Imperial Irrigation District and last November when AirTouch requested authorization BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 12 September 9, 1995 from the Council to submit the current application. He advised that the School Board has no health concerns related to the monopole and has authorized its installation subject to Council's approval. He referred to the radio?engineering study which show overlays of AirTouch's existing service, their proposed service if the monopole is located at the Sports Complex, and proposed service if located at the School District's new Administration Center. He advised that AirTouch has requested a continuance of this matter to January 16, 1996. Mr. Hardy Strozier, 3151 Airway Avenue, Costa Mesa, of Planning Associates and representative for AirTouch Cellular, advised that the continuance was requested so that additional information on the radio frequency study can be provided as w?ll as time to meet with the homeowners associations. They feel that a misconception exists about the proximity of the proposed monopole. He felt that there is a growing significant need to get the proposed wireless communication in place. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Strozier advised that AirTouch would adjust their monopole to whatever height the light poles are adjusted to. The microwave dishes would range from three to eight feet in diameter and would transmit communications from the Sports Complex site to a major receiving station. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Strozier advised that their microwave dish in Rancho Mirage is roof?mounted at approximately 60 feet on top of the Eisenhower Hospital. The Sports Complex monopole wouldn't operate as well at a 60-foot height, but better than it would four miles north. Council Member Perkins was concerned that other cellular companies would ask to locate in the same area. Mr. Strozier didn't believe that approval of AirTouch's application would legally bind the Council to approve other applications. Re said that L.A. Cellular's equipment needs are somewhat different than theirs. He felt that reliable cellular communication is a public safety issue that shouldn't be overlooked. Council Member Perkins asked if the monopole would clear up the 5:00 p.m. congestion in their system to which Mr. Strozier responded yes. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Strozier said that he didn't know where L.A. Cellular's equipment is located, but their service area does overlap. He stated that AirTouch's system is close to exceeding capacity and they expect to add three to four additional monopole sites in the valley. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 13 September 19, 1995 Ms. Ann Grosfils, 50-205 Mountain Shadows Road, spoke in opposition to the monopole. She felt that it would be a health hazard and should be located in an industrial zone instead of a residential area. She doesn't have any problems with her L.A. Cellular service in the Cove area. Mr. Robert La?on, 50-115 Doral Street, representing several homeowners in the La Quinta Fairways that are opposed to the monopole, felt that it poses a liability concern and would set a precedent. He also felt that it would detract from the aesthetic values of the community. Mr. Jack Nelson, 78-707 Saguaro Drive, was vehemently opposed to the monopole because he felt that it would reduce property values. He questioned what other businesses the Council would allow on the school grounds if they approve a monopole. Ms. Linda Pi?ts, 78-748 Via Sonata, was opposed to the monopole being located directly behind her backyard. She was aware of the light poles at the school when she bought her home, but felt that the monopole would be too high and look unsightly. Mr. Bob Taeckens, 77-811 Calle Sinaloa, felt that monopoles should be located in remote areas. He?s been involved with installation of such facilities and believes that microwave dishes are a safety and health hazard. Mr. Joe Mhiistrelli, 50-445 Mountain Shadows Road, developer of the Painted Cove & Bajada tracts, advised that he?s still completely opposed to the monopole for the same reasons he gave at other meetings. He referred to the size and height of the monopole and the placement of the lighting fixture, the width of the antenna array, and the danger of locating such a large poje on school property. He felt that a monopole would detract from the neighhorhocd and lower property values. He didn?t believe that a desperate need exists as proposed by AirTouch. Mr. Wayne Guralnick, 74-399 Highway Ill, Palm Desert, legal counsel for the Painted Cove and Bajada Homeowners Associations, pointed out that health risks with cellular antennas are uncertain and residents in the area will be aware of its existence and will always notice it. He urged the Council to deny the continuance and appeal. Mr. Richard Steinke, 79-045 River Rock, was opposed to the monopole and asked the Council to deny the appeal. Mr. Richard Cotlirim. 79-165 Big Horn Trail, spoke in opposition to the monopole and said that he's very satisfied with L. A. Cellular service. He reviewed the offer of Mr. Ministrelli to provide commercial property at an alternative location as well as financial assistance to retrofit the Sports Complex lighting. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 14 September 19, 1995 Ms. Joanne McLaughlin, 53-685 Avenida Madero, was concerned about the health risks of locating a monopole on the school site and urged the Council to deny the appeal. Mr. Tom CuIlinan, 73-385 Juniper, Palm Desert, representing Rancho La Quinta homeowners, spoke in opposition to the monopole, pointing out that the monopole at the Eisenhower Hospital has to be screened by a parapet wall because of its unsightlmess. Mr. Gary Avis, 78-710 Via Sonata, representing the Parc La Quinta Homeowners Association, stated that they oppose the monopole and believe that AirTouch should improve their network through other methods. He was in support of leaving the light poles at 70 feet and retrofitting them with new fixtures as one alternative in the Musco Lighting Study proposes. He didn't believe that the size of the monopole and equipment had been accurately represented by the applicant and urged the Council not to be threatened by AirTouch's pleas for safety in the community. There being no one else wishing speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Council Member Perkins felt that the Council's?wish was to come to a fair conclusion for everyone and had not felt threatened by AirTouch. He felt that AirTouch's request to improve their system was reasonable and that it should be improved. He doesn't have any problem with L. A. Cellular service, but his wife has experienced problems with her AirTouch Cellular serviee and was recently unable to report an accident on Highway 111. The reason that he supported AirTouch Cellular's request in the past was because he hoped that the Sports Complex lighting system could be improved and the number of light poles reduced by 50%, but the lighting study fails to support that. Therefore, he didn't feel that the benefit received by AirTouch's improved system would outweigh the detrimental effects to the surrounding homeowners and advised that he wouldn't support their appeal. He hoped that AirTouch would find an alternate location away from residential areas. Council Member Cathcart questioned the height necessary for AirTouch's equipment to be effective, pointing out that originally their minimum height was 85 feet, but was later reduced to 80 feet. He advised that he wouldn't support the appeal'?ecause he felt that the monopole would be unsightly at the proposed location. Council Member Bangerter advised that her greatest concern was the possible health risks to the children and would not support the appeal. Council Member Sniff advised that representation of the people is the Council's number one priority and he felt that opposition to the monopole by surrounding residents was obvious. He also was concerned that approval of the monopole would set a precedent for future applications. He felt that the matter has been dealt with long enough and that the applicant has reasonable alternatives to consider. He supported denial of the appeal. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 15 September 9, 1995 Mayor Pena was pleased that the residents in the area attended the meetings and learned the accurate details of the monopole proposal because he felt that many were previously misinformed. He felt that cellular communication is an important issue, but that the concerns of those living in the area must be considered. He believed that the City should work with cellular communication companies, but should also encourage them to consider alternate sites if the initial site is opposed. Council Member Perkins complimented the applicant and the residents for their conduct during Council?s consideration of this matter. He believed that everything possible had been done to come to an agreeable solution. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to deny the appeal of AirTouch Cellular and support the action of the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously MINUTE ORDER NO.95-168. PREsENIAIIQ??S Council Member Perkins presented a proclamation to Mayor Pena for his service as a Volunteer Firefighter. Mayor Pena stated that his days as a Volunteer Firefighter were some of the best and thanked the Council for their recognition. 2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27031 MINOR CHANGE, AMENDMENT 1); A REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR AN EIGHT-LOT SUBDIVISION OF 65.4 ACRES ON PROPERTY SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111, NORTH OF AVENUE 47, EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET, AND WEST OF ADAMS STREET. APPLICANT: MR. WILLIAMS A. BENNEYAN, PRESH)ENT OF BENART CAPITAL MANAGEMENT. 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 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 16 September 19,1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS, RECONFIRMING THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND GRANTING APPROVAL OF A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27031 MINOR CHANGE, AMENDMENT #1) TO ALLOW A MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON 65.4+ ACRES. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-66 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 3. TENT?VE TRACT MAP 25953 SECOND EXTENSION); A REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A 139-LOT SUBDIVISION OF 3S.4 ACRES ON PROPERTY AT THE NORTIIWEST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE AND DUNE PALMS ROAD. APPLICANT: MRS. JANE HIRSCH. 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. RESOLUTION NO. 95?7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS, RECONRIRMING THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25953 TO ALLOW A SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION PROJECT ON 3S.4+ ACRES.. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-67 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. BUSINESS SESSION..................continued 2. CONSIDERATION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING OU) BETWEEN THE CITIES OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY AND THE COUNTY TO AGREE TO WORK TOGETHER TOWARD HIRING A VENDOR TO DESIGN, MANAGE THE CONSTRU?ON, AND OPERATE A SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION WITH MATERIAL RECOVERY CAPABILITIES. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 17 September 19, 1995 Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the MOU is the first step the Council will take in a regional effort to develop a solid waste transfer station. It is only a commitment to work with the other cities in this endeavor and does not commit the Citys finances or wastestream. The Request for Proposals RFP) are due October 6, 1995 and the Council will consider a recommendation in January, 1996. He advised that William OToole, the consultant, was present and available for questions. In response to Mayor Peta, Mr. Herman advised that none of the other jurisdictions have adopted the MOU yet, but the matter is on their agendas. Council Member Sniff advised that the MOU would position the City to be a participant, pointing Out that there are nQ commitments. Re supported its approval and expected all of the jurisdictions to adopt it. Mayor Peha wished to move slowly on this issue because of the many changes in the laws that are taking place. Mr. Herman advised that any commitment of funds would be brought back to the Council for approval. Council Member Sniff advised that the City could opt out of the process at any time and would not be making an irreversible decision. Mr. Baker, Principal Planner, advised that each commitment within the MOU would be brought before the Council for approval. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Baker advised that the RFP calls for a typical transfer station, but allows high-tech alternative proposals. Material recovery up to 5 % will take place at the facility and it will have expansion capabilities. In response to Mayor Pen-a, Mr. Baker advised that site location is a part of the RFP process. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Baker advised that a central location along Interstate 10 would be preferable. Council Member Sniff felt that maximum accessibility and minimum intrusion into municipalities is important. He believed that the issue must be dealt with because of the upcoming landfill closures. Council Member Cathcart felt that a regional effort is the best way to deal with the issue. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 8 September 19, 1995 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to approve the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize the Mayor to sign the MOU for the development of a solid waste transfer station/materials recovery facility. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTh ORDER NO.95-169. 3. See Page 8. 4. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 11.96, TITLE 11 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING SECTION 11.96.005, REGULATING SKATEBOARDING AND ROLLER SKATING. This item was pulled from the agenda. 5. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO SECTION 8.11 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FLOOD HAZARD REGULATIONS. Staff report is on file in the City Clerks Office. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the ordinance language came from the Department of Water Resources. M?ON t was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to take up Ordinance No. 273 by title and number only and waive further reading. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE NO.273 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 8.11 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to introduce Ordinance No.273 on first reading. Motion carried by the following vOte: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 19 September 19, 1995 6. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE TO THE ANNUAL LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE IN SAN FRANCISCO, OCTOBER 22-24, 1995. M?ON It was moved by Mayor Pena and seconded by Council Member Cathcart to appoint Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter as the delegate and Mayor Pena as alternate to the League of California Cities Conference. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-170. 7. INTERVIEWS FOR CULTURAL AFFAIRS COMMISSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM. The Council proceeded to interview the following applicants for the Cultural Affairs Commission: Mr. John Detlie Mr. Robert W. Marks Mr. Archie Sharp Ms. Judy Vossler Mr. Robert Marks and Ms. Judy Vossler were not present. Mayor Pen a voted for Archie Sharp Council Member Bange?er voted for Archie Sharp Council Member Catbcart voted for Archie Sharp Council Member Perkins voted for Archie Sharp Council Member SIllif voted for Judy Vossler MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to appoint Mr. Archie Sharp to the Cultural Affairs Commission term to expire June 30, 1996. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-171. 8. TRANSMITTAL OF TREASURER'S REPORT DATED JUNE 30, 1995 AND JULY 31, 1995 FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE LA QIJINTA FINANCING AUTHORITY. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to receive and file the Treasurer?s Report dated June 30, 1995 and July 31, 1995 for the City of La Quinta. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-172. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 20 September 19, 1995 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to receive and file the Treasurer?s Report dated June 30, 995 and July 31, 1995 for the La Quinta Financing Authority. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-173. 9. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE AMENDMENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TITLE 13 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that on August 1, 1995, the Council considered the first reading of Ordinance No.272 and this resolution will certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the adoption of the amendments to that ordinance. RESOLUTION NO.95-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALifORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGAThD NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-292 PREPARED FOR MUNICIPAL CODE 95-045. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-68 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 10. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO.272- SUBDIVISION REGIJL?ONS. ORDINANCE NO.272 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 13 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SUBDIVISIONS. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Ordinance No.272 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 21 September 19, 1995 CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED AUGUST 15, 1995, SEPTEMBER 5,1995, AND SEPTEMBER 19,1995. 2. APPROVAL OF THE HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION WORK PLAN. 3. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO ALLOW TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CALLE ESTADO BETWEEN DESERT CLUB DRIVE AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS ON FRIDAYS BETWEEN OCTOBER, 1995 THROUGH APRIL, 1996 FOR THE LA QUINTA MAINSTREET MARKETPLACE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINOR TEMPORARY OUTDOOR EVENT PERMIT MTOE 95-098) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. APPLICANT: LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIVE 1A-TON PICK-UP TRUCKS. 5. AUTHORIZ?ON TO EXECUTE A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COVE AREA URBAN FORESTRY PROJECT. 6. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR, SENIOR CENTER SUPERVISOR AND ONE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIONER TO ATTEND THE CALIFORNIA & PACIFIC SOUTHWEST RECREATION AND PARK CONFERENCE IN SAN DIEGO, FEBRUARY 8-11, 1996. 7. ACCEPTANCE OF ADAMS STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM AVENUE 47 TO HIGHWAY 111, PROJECT NO.92-4. S. ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT DEEDS FOR MILES AVENUE AND DUNE PALMS ROAD, PROJECT NO.95-03. 9. APPROVAL OF FINAL MAPS AND SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS FOR TRACTS 239354 AND 23535. 10. REPORT OF ACTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON PUBLIC USE PERMIT NO.95-016 FOR DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; APPROVING A DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL SERVICE CENTER WITH APPROXIMATELY 164,000 SQ. Fr. OF FLOOR SPACE, LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSE?ON OF DUNE PALMS ROAD AND AVENUE 48. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 22 September 19, 1995 11. APPROVAL OF TITLE CHANGE FROM ADMINISTrATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK TO CITY CLERK AND APPROVAL OF AMENDED JOB DESCRIPTION. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF PURCHASE OF SIGNAL POLES FROM COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT WASHINGTON STREET AND STATE HIGHWAY 111. 13. AUTHORIZATION TO RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE 1995 SLURRY SEAL AND RESTRIPING PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 95A)6. 14. APPROVAL OF THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU CHANGE TO THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO ALLOW DESERT HOT SPRINGS TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE CVB. Ms. Terry Henderson, 54-711 Eisenhower Drive, addressed the Council on Consent Calendar Item No.13. She was concerned that the timing of the slurry seal project along Washington Street in conjunction with the redesigning of the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection would cause traffic congestion problems. She suggested that the Council consider completing Adams Street to alleviate traffic on Washington Street. Council Member Perkins asked if the slurry sealing would take place prior to restriping the streets to which Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, responded yes. Council Member Perkins advised that a delay in the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection redesign would concern him because of the difficulty in obtaining CalTrans approvals. Mr. Cosper advised that the construction is expected to take place in December and January. The construction planned is not major it consists of opening up two northbound lanes on Washington Street. The slurry seal work on Washington Street will not include the area between Avenue 48 and the Washington Street bridge. The contractor is required to keep one lane of traffic open during the slurry seal process along Washington Street. The complete process is expected to be done in a short period of time and shouldn't cause much traffic congestion. He advised that the biggest problems are in residential areas where vehicles exit driveways onto recently slurry-sealed streets. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with Item No.3 being approved by RESOLUTION NO.95- 69. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-174. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 23 September 19, 1995 STUDY SESSION DISCUSSION RELATING TO REAPPROPRIATION OF CERTAIN CAPITAL FUNDS FRITZ BURNS POOL PROJECT). Mayor Pena asked the City Attorney if his conflict of interest with the Fritz Burns Pool would negate him from participating in the discussions regarding the reappropriation of infrastructure funds. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that there was a 4-0 vote not to proceed with the Fritz Burns pool project as originally proposed in the full amount of money that was allocated and there was a tie/non-action vote to consider a $1.4 million pool. Therefore, she felt that there was clear direction that the difference between the original amount allocated and the $1.4 million is still in limbo because there was no clear action taken on it one way or the other. Because of the earlier action taken that the Council clearly does not want to go forward with a pool of that scope, the Mayor's participation in discussions about reallocation of those funds for something will not, in and of itself, affect the pool, so he will not be participating in an action discussing those funds that would impact the pool one way or another. She suggested that the discussion be separated into two parts: 1) the reappropriation of the $339,312, and 2) discussion of the $1.4 million. Mayor Pena abstained from the discussion regarding the use of the pool Infrastructure Funds in excess of $339,312. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the original, estimated construction cost for the Fritz Burns Park and pool was $2,882,552 which came from three sources: 1) $1,138,572 from the Community Services Fund; 2) $525,000 from the Quimby Fund; and 3) $1,218,980 from the Infrastructure Fund. Expenditures to-date total $443,240. He proceeded to explain the expenditures made since June when this figure was being reported as $339,000. The expenditures to-date plus the $700,000 set aside for the park construction leave a balance of $1,739,312 in available funding for this project. He then reviewed the three scenarios available as delineated in the staff report) as follows: 1. Proceed with the pool facility as originally designed which is no longer an option based on Council's earlier decision). 2. Proceed with a pool facility reduced in scope from the original design. The estimated costs to complete a pool facility reduced in scope is $1,400,000, leaving $339,000 in capital funds which can be reappropriated. 3. Do not build a pool facility which would result in $1,739,000 becoming available for reappropriation to other capital projects. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 24 September 9, 1995 Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter asked what the various funds can be used for. Mr. Cosper advised that the Community Services Fund is the $1 million received from landmark Land in exchange for releasing the right?of-way on Jefferson Street for the PGA West project and those funds historically have been earmarked for the Fritz Burns Park and future phases. The Quimby Funds can only be used for purchase of park lands and/or park improvements. Infrastructure Funds are fees charged to developers and can be used for new streets, parks. and other things that are development driven they cannot be used for maintenance. The Infrastructure Funds can be used for construction of a police station or new squad cars, but not for additional police officers. Council Member Perkins asked how needed street improvements would be accomplished in the absence of Infrastructure Funds and if the General Fund, which can be used for police protection, could be used for such improvements. Mr. Cosper advised that a working balance is kept in the Infrastructure Fund Account and additional revenues are expected to be received each year from new developments. The General Fund can be borrowed from on a short-term basis and reimbursed when Infrastructure Fees are received. New developments can also be conditioned to construct the needed improvements and receive reimbursement when Infrastructure Funds become available. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the Infrastructure Fund is tied to a list of specific projects and cannot be used for street improvements that aren?t contained in the enabling ordinance. Those projects generally are regional improvements. A generic list of park improvements is included, but the street improvements are more specific. He advised that a revision of the Infrastructure Fee or Development Fee Program is currently under consideration and is likely to have different aspects of the program budgeted separately. Generally, the General Fund is not used for infrastructure projects except in eniergencies. He advised that an estimated balance in excess of $1 million would exist in the Infrastructure Fund at the close of this year. Such a balance is maintained for the purpose of handling emergency situations. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper advised that the total of the expenditures contained in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program is approximately $5 million. The bulk of it will come from the Infrastructure Fund and some from Quimby Funds. Council Member Cathcart pointed Out that a drastic reduction in development would drastically reduce the projected revenues from which those improvements are intended to be funded from. If such a reduction should happen, the planned projects would not be done unless the General Fund is used to cover the shortfall. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 25 September 9, 1995 Mr. Cosper advised that development of the program revenue was based on growth and tne project list was based on the demands from that growth. 1t?s unlikely that the demands would exist if theres no growth. Council Member Cathcart asked if some of the projects listed in the five-year program were not development driven to which Mr. Cosper responded yes. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter understood that Quimby Funds are for park-facility use and use of the Community Services Funds is very limited. Mr. Cosper confirmed that and added that the Community Services Fund has historically been tied closely to the Fritz Burns Park and its improvements. Council Member Perkins asked if the Community Services Fund could be used for a Park Ranger Program to hire officers to patrol a park) to which Mr. Cosper responded no. Council Member Cathcart understood that $1.1 million was in the Community Services Fund Account and asked why only $520,312 is shown as being available. Mr. Cosper advised that approximately $6OO,OO?) of the Community Services Fund was spent or set-aside for park construction, $5,000 of the Quimby Funds was spent for development of the park plan, and none of the Infrastructure Funds have been spent to- date. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper advised that $520,332 from he Community Services Fund and $879,668 from the Infrastructure Fund would be used to construct the pool if the $1.4 million redesigned construction is approved. Council Member Cathcart advised that he was stunned at this point. He has been under the assumption for several months that $1.1 million existed in the Community Services Fund that would be used for pool construction and the balance of a $1.4 million pool would be paid with $339,000 from the Infrastructure Fund. Now he understands that the Infrastructure Fund portion of the pool project is actually $879,668, money that could be otherwise used for street improvements such as the completion of Adams Street. Mr. Genovese advised that the original funding did include $1.1 million in Community Services Funds and to assume that that amount continues to remain in the account would require an assumption that no monies have been expended from that fund for this project. He cautioned that Infrastructure Funds may only be used for projects that are listed in the project list in the ordinance. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 26 September 19, 1995 In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that if Adams Street is listed as a potential project in the enabling ordinance, approximately 32 feet of pavement is all that the City could accomplish in that project due to the developer responsibilities. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Genovese advised that the Council-approved Capital Improvement Program establishes the priorities and use of Infrastructure Funds. Ms. Honeywell advised that the Council cannot modify the priority list of projects until the Council reviews the new development fees that are currently under study. Council Member Sniff wasn't opposed to reallocating $339,000 of the Infrastructure Funds, but that's as far as he was willing to go at the present time. He wished to see it allocated to median improvements in areas such as Washington Street, Eisenhower Drive, and Calle Tampico. Council Member Cathcart asked if the Council would be reappropriating the $339,000 at this meeting. Ms. Honeywell advised that she anticipated the Council giving the staff some specific direction regarding future actions on the funds. She recommended that if the Council wishes to unappropriate the $339,000 from the pool project, that they direct staff to bring back a list of allowable expenditures for consideration. Council Member Cathcart asked if Mayor Pena could participate in the discussion of the $339,000 to which Ms. Honeywell responded yes as long as the discussion is limited to that amount. Mr. Genovese requested that any such discussion be preceded by a motion that would clarify the limited discussion. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter, Mr. Genovese advised that staff would begin work on the Capital Improvement Program in January and Council's review would take place in February or March, 1996. Council Member Perkins suggested that the Council direct staff to come back with a list of possible projects that could be accomplished with a certain amount of money that the Council wishes to reappropriate from the pool project for possible action at a subsequent meeting. Ms. Honeywell was concerned about the Council taking action that hasn't been properly noticed to the public that specific final action to reappropriate certain amounts of the Infrastructure Funds to specific projects would take place. She didn't have a problem with the Council fully discussing the matter and giving direction to staff to come back with BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 27 September 19, 1995 more specific information that would be properly noticed to the public before action is taken. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter, Ms. Honeywell advised that the two different amounts could be agendized separately to allow the Mayor to participate in a portion of the discussion. Council Member Cathcart wished to see staff's wish list for the entire amount discussed, pointing out that the options would be greatly limited with only $339,0O() versus $?,2l8,0Oo. Council Member Sniff advised that he wouldn't support anything other than the reallocation of $339,000. Council Member Perkins advised that the Council wouldn't have to accept any of the options. but he felt that they should be flexible and willing to look at all of them. Council Member Cathcart felt that this was an example of a Council that doesn't want to do anything. He pointed out that a decision has been made not to build the pool as originally designed. It has also been shown that the Council is not going to go forward with a pool at this time. Therefore, he wished to have all of the Council's options brought before them for consideration, which would include an option to move forward with a pool. He realized that there's some hope that there will be a change in the Council after the Election and that the money to build a pool will still exist, but he felt that the Council shouldn't wait that long to look at its options. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter wasn't opposed to looking at it, but felt that it would be more appropriately done during the Capital Improvement Program process. Council Member Perkins wasn't sure that there is an ideal time, but felt that the Council would be failing to fulfill its obligations if no action is taken. Council Member Cathcart questioned whether staff could have Capital Improvement Program ready for review by the next meeting. Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter felt that the funds should be separated on the agenda to allow the Mayor the opportunity to participate in part of the discussions. Council Member Cathcart preferred to discuss the total amount first. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 28 September 19,1995 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Cathcart/Perkins to direct staff to, not later than the second scheduled meeting in October, come back to the Council with options for the $1,218,980 of Infrastructure Funds available and provide options for the expenditure of those monies. Council Member Cathcart asked if staff would be able to make suggestions for reappropriation of just $339,000 also at that meeting and Mr. Cosper advised that he would. Ms. Honeywell suggested that the Council request staff to split the item on the agenda if they wish for the Mayor to participate in part of the discussions. Council Member Cathcart reiterated his intent to discuss the reappropriation of the $1,218,980 amount, the $879,668 amount. and the $339,000 amount. Motion failed with Council Member Sniff and Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter voting NO and Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-175. MOTION It was moved by Council Member Sniff and seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter to direct staff to determine possible capital improvement uses for the $339,000 tn excess of the $1.4 million and report back to the Council by the second meeting in October. Council Member Cathcart advised that he would vehemently oppose the motion. Council Member Perkins felt that such an action wouldn?t be fulfilling the Council's obligations. He advised that he couldn't make a decision without seeing all of the options. Motion failed with Council Members Cathcart, Perkins and Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter voting NO and Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-176. M?ON It was moved by Council Member PerkinslCathcart to direct staff to, not later than the second scheduled meeting in October, come back to the Council with options for the $1,218,980 of Infrastructure Funds available and provide options for the expenditure of those monies. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter asked if all three options would be discussed to which Council Member Cathcart responded yes. Motion carried with Council Member Sniff voting NO and Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-177. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 29 September 19, 1995 2. DISCUSSION OF SPORTS COMPLEX LIGHTING STUDY. Council concurred on continuing this item to the next meeting and directed staff to contact Mr. Ministrelli. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAT ITEMS All reports were noted and filed REPORT ON POTENTIAL REBATE ON LIGHTING & LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she researched the issue of potential rebates to certain property owners within the Lighting & Landscape Assessment District as directed by Council and has concluded that a finding would have to be made that those properties were wrongfully assessed in order for it not to be deemed a gift of public funds. The entire assessment could be put at risk and deemed flawed by the courts if such a finding is made because the assessment formula can't be deemed wrong for only a select group of properties. Council Member Cathcart asked staff to address this matter during the next discussion of the Lighting & Landscape Assessment District. 2. REPORT ON BEER HUNTER SMOKING ISSUE. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that there's a provision in the law that allows facilities that are primarily devoted to serving alcoholic beverages in which food service is incidental, to allow smoking. The food menu at the Beer Hunter appears to be the same throughout the entire restaurant, but since their primary use is open to some definition, she advised that the County Health Department. who is the enforcing agency, could be requested to investigate to determine if the restaurant meets the criteria of a bar. Mayor Pena felt that the Health Department would have included that investigation as a part of their normal procedure when they issued a health permit. Ms. Honeywell wasn't sure that a health permit specifically sets a smoking or non-smoking area. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 30 September 19, 1995 Council Member Perkins pointed Out that they only served sandwiches when it first opened, but now they're serving full dinners. He felt that it should be determined whether it's a bar or a restaurant. Council Member Sniff asked how such a distinction is made. Ms. Honeywell advised that the Health Department might have established criteria by which to make that distinction, such as a review of the establishment's receipts. Council Member Perkins referred to anQther restaurant which allows smoking in the bar where food as well as alcohol is served, but smoking is not allowed in the restaurant area. Council Member Cathcart believed that the Beer Hunter is primarily a bar, but was concerned about sending the Health Department to investigate them because it is a successful business. Ms. Honeywell pointed Out that anyone can call and ask the Health Department to investigate. Council Member Perkins advised that several people have complained about smoking being allowed and he would like to know if it's classified as a restaurant or a bar so that he can properly answer those complaints. Mayor Peha advised that the Health Department makes periodic checks of all restaurants. There was no further direction given to staff. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBILITY OF CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE ENFORCING PARKING ON PROPERTY. Council Member Perkins asked that this matter be continued to a later meeting to allow the City Attorney and himself to continue their research on this matter. Mayor Pena asked. if loading/unloading zones on private property would be addressed at the same time. Ms. Honeywell advised that her research would cover everything that the City can regulate on private parking facilities through the adoption of an ordinance. She?planned to give Council Member Perkins the appropriate sections of the Code, but would prepare a report for Council if they wished. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 31 September 19, 1995 Mayor Pena didn't think a report was necessary. He wasn't sure how involved painting of a curb would be. Council Member Perkins felt that the public learns real quick if there's no enforcement and will violate it. Council Member Sniff suggested that this issue be communicated to the Chamber of Commerce for the purpose of soliciting responses from its members. Ms. Honeywell advised that some regulation is allowed by the State Vehicle Code, but it requires. the cooperation of property owners. Council Member Perkins felt that the management at the Vons Shopping Center would cooperate in this matter. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING STUDY SESSION IThMS. Council Member Cathcart suggested that the Council direct the City Attorney to create a policy regarding Study Sessions to determine what the Council can or cannot in these sessions. Re advised that Roberts Rules of Qrder don't address Study Sessions and it's addressed very little by the Council's Rules of Procedures resulting in an unclear policy. Council directed the City Attorney, City Manager, and City Clerk to review the Council's Rules of Procedures to better define when actions can be taken on Study Session items. Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened and recessed to Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION 1. Conference with legal counsel regardlng anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54946.9(B) two cases). 2. Conference with legal counsel concerning iltigation, Travertine, Case No, OS-3937, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(A) 3. Conference with legal counsel regarding Ilitigation, Landmark Bankruptcy, Case Nos. 2:92-CV-5287 through 5291 and Case No.2:92-3548-i, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(A). BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02 D City Council Minutes 32 September 19, 1995 Council reconvened with no decision being made which requires reporting pursuant to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code Brown Act). There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Res ctfully submitted SA?UNDRA L JUHOLA City Clerk City of La Quinta California BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:40:41AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 09-U02 19-U02 95-U02