Loading...
1994 02 15 CC MinutesP LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 1994 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at 3:00 P.M. by Mayor Pena followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT. Council Members Bangerter, McCartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena ABSENT.. None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Mr. Hunt, City Manager, noted that the date for Consent Item No.1 on both the Council and Redevelopment Agency agendas should read February 15, 1994. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, asked that a Closed Session item be added to the Redevelopment Agency Agenda under Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding the potential acquisition of property relating to the Amcor or Housing Partners proposal. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney that a Closed Session item under the Redevelopment Agency dealing with Amcor and land acquisition be added to the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney that the Minutes of February 1, 1994 be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS None PRESENTATIONS None PUBLIC COMMENT Marry Langer, President, Coachella Valley Community Concerts, briefly reported on the Community Concerts Outreach Program in the schools and presented a video of the most recent BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 2 February 15, 1994 concert performed. He advised that they desire to shape the students' cultural taste, which is made possible through a grant. He noted that many letters have been received from the students expressing their pleasure in the performances and expressed his appreciation for the City's support. Mayor Pena expressed the City's appreciation for the organization's work in developing an awareness of music and the arts in our community. Council Member Bangerter introduced Petr Strynal and Lenka Filipcova' exchange students from the town of Bystrice in the Republic of Czechoslovakia. She noted that this exchange program has been made possible through a committee made up of citizens within La Quinta. Justin Gilstrap and Nicole Nard, students from La Quinta, were exchange students this past summer in Bystrice. The Mayor of Bystrice noted in a letter her appreciation for the friendship that has developed between both cities through this program. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE A. Letter from Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District requesting sponsorship of the annual Easter Egg Hunt. Council Member Sniff asked that this request be continued to the first meeting in March. Council Member McCartney asked for additional information on the tot? cost and what other organizations are contributing. Council directed staff to agendize this request for March 1, 1994. B. Letter from City of Pasadena urging adopting of a resolution relating to rampant violence. Noted and filed. C. Letter from Wilma South regarding standards for minimum house size in the R-1- Zone. Council concurred in directing staff to make a cursory review and respond to the letter. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 3 February 15, 1994 CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST OF COACHELLA VALLEY MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY FOR CONTRIBUTION. Mr. Crites, Chairman of the Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy, advised that the Mountains Conservancy was created in 1991 and since that time has purchased approximately 6,000 acres of mountainous lands. He noted that many Valley cities have benefitted from the Conservancy engaging in purchasing land and working as a facilitator with other agencies in land exchanges. He stated that the Conservancy was created without a source of funding and explained the various methods they are looking to in order to establish a much-needed solid funding base, one of which is the Coachella Valley License Plate Program. He noted that Yosemite has been successful with the license plate program. as well as other Conservancies currently considering this program. If the proposal is successful, it will guarantee approximately $50,000 for the first year with half of the proceeds going to the State for their expenses, and the Conservancy receiving on a yearly basis, approximately $100,000 thereafter. It will also advertise the message of the Conservancy, *?Conserving Desert Mountains. He advised that The Nature Conservancy contributed $5,000 and Friends of the Indian Canyons contributed $5,000 because the Conservancy was the prime mover in placing us on the CALPAW initiative which is on the spring ballot. If passed for conservation measures, the Valley will receive $18 million to go toward the purchase of land, trail improvements, signage, etc. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Crites stated that if the City would Commit these funds. the Conservancy could fund against themselves. however, the sooner the money is received, the sooner they could move forward with the campaign. Council Member Sniff asked for the total amount necessary to activate and maintain the program for the next year. Mr. Crites advised that with the help of many volunteers, they need funding of approximately $25,000. Every DMV office within the State of California, by the direction of the Governor, displays all license plate campaigns within California. Therefore, they are already receiving requests from various areas of California interested in the license plate. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Crites explained the various sources of advertising they will be using. Council Member Sniff commented that La Quinta was one of the first to contribute to the Conservancy, and that he would feel more comfortable and secure if other cities were making equal contributions, because they, too, enjoy the view of the mountains. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 4 February 15, 1994 Mr. Crites commented that the Conservancy has not requested funding from the City of La Quinta since the initial contribution, whereas other cities have contributed annually. He noted that a permanent source of funding would give the Conservancy the ability to purchase land with money other than City money. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Crites advised that they designed their brochure sirnilar to that of Yosemite's because of its success. He also advised that they've hired a person who worked on the Yosemite campaign to assist with this one. Council Member Perkins felt that it is essential to the quality of life in La Quinta that the mountains be protected, therefore, he supported the request as presented. Council Member Bangerter agreed and also supported the request because it benefits each city. She referred to the contribution summary and noted that our contributions are in line with the other cities. Council Member Perkins asked if the funds were available. Mayor Pena believed that the Conservancy was looking for a commitment rather than the funds at this point. Council Member Sniff felt uncomfortable using the majority of the funds in the Special Projects Contingency Fund, however, he could support allocating $2,500 this year and $2,500 next fiscal year. Mayor Pena commented that Council's support is obviously there and suggested that staff further research the availability of funding and report back with their recommendations. Mr. Crites suggested that the Council make a motion encouraging other cities to support this effort. Council concurred. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to support the Conservancy's request and direct staff to look into the budgeting of that request in the next fiscal year's budget and also indicate to all the other valley Cities the City's support of the request and to ask them to share in it equally. Council Member Bangerter felt that the total amount of $5,000 should be stated because the Conservancy needs the committed amount in order to obtain other funding. Council Member McCartney commented that the motion was stated in the next fiscal year,' indicating there would be no funding for this year. He wished to move forward BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 5 February 15, 1994 with a partial funding of $2,500 this year and $2,500 next fiscal year, therefore, he could not support the motion as stated. Council Member Bangerter agreed. Council Member Perkins withdrew his second. Motion FAILED for lack of a second. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to provide $2,500 from the Council's Special Projects Contingency Fund No.4110-120-000 to the Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy and further direct staff to place an additional $2,500 into next year's budget and also indicate to other valley cities that we support this effort and request that they do likewise. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9446. 2. CONSIDERATION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BSI, INC. FOR LIGHTING AM) LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEERING FOR FY 1994-95. Mr. Cosper, City Engineer, advised that the issue before the Council is consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with BSI Consultants to prepare the Engineer's Report for the Lighting and Landscape Assessment District. This report must be prepared on an annual basis outlining the expenses to be incurred in the next fiscal year and determining the assessments to be levied to property owners within the district. He noted that BSI has performed this service in the past, and they propose to prepare the report for $17,500, which is $2,000 less than last year. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Cosper advised that the cost is less because once they develop the information on the parcels the data base becomes more accurate, which makes the assessments much easier to develop. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the State of California mandates the program. Council Member McCartney asked if the data base would be available to the City should we decide to use another company. Mr. Cosper advised that BSI has control over the data base. Mayor Pena felt that we should have access to the disk, because we are paying them to gather the information. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 6 February 15, 1994 Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, felt that BSI might have a legitimate feeling that they have a proprietary interest in their data base format. She did not feel that it's totally unreasonable for them to take such a position. Jeff Cooper, 1351 Consultant, advised that they have developed the software to operate the system. which can be purchased from them. This is not something they give along with the Engineer's Report, however, all of the information gathered is the City's and can be put on a disk. Council Member McCartney felt that the City should look into this further. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve a Professional Services Agreement with BSI Consultants, Inc. to prepare the FY 1994/95 Landscape and Lighting District No. 89-1 Engineer's Report in an amount not to exceed $17,500. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.9447. Council Member Perkins requested that staff begin keeping track of both Federal- and State-mandated programs and what it costs the City in order to keep the public informed of the problems the City faces due to some mandated programs. Council concurred. 3. FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH PARCEL MAP 27681 BANGERTER. Council Member Bangerter abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Cosper, City Engineer, stated that the issue before the Council is to accept the improvements relative to Parcel Map 27681. Adequate funds are available to cover the warranties/securities and staff recommended acceptance of these improvements. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to approve the final acceptance of the improvements associated with Parcel Map 27681 Bangerter. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-48. 4. CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL RESPONSE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY'S PROPOSAL TO FORM A SANITATION DISTRICT. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that at the previous Council meeting, Council directed the City Attorney to review the legal opiniors contained in the proposal. Staff BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 7 February 15, 1994 recommended that the City not join the District or object to the County creating a District provided that the Board of Supervisors would not be changed without unanimous approval by all cities in the County and that the County transfer all funds and assets to the Sanitation District. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, reviewed the staff report and the legal opinions prepared two years ago. She concurred with staff's recommendation because the overriding purpose appears to be for the County to transfer financial and potential legal liability for the operation of these facilities off of their General Fund onto the District. While it's true that even as a City that merely participates by using the landfills in the sense of being an originator and a source for some of the products that ultimately end up in the landfill, it's difficult from a legal perspective to say there is no additional exposure in becoming an actual owner and operator of that facility. And while they make some arguments that the exposure is not that much different, she felt that as long as we have an option of not becoming an actual member of the Sanitation District and merely negotiating our agreement as to what type of commitment we want to make for participating in terms of sharing a certain level of trash flow to the District it's difficult to say how that's not a legally more cautious approach to this. If the only benefit they've been able to show is that we'll have an even greater voice in participating in the decisions, as legal counsel, they would not recommend that as being the preferred approach. Ms. Honeywell further advised that funding of the District will be from a new bond issue based on the revenue sources contained within the assurances of the different trash flows from each City. If the City is not a member, we would only have a contractual obligation to supply a certain amount, however, if the City were a member of the issuing authority, there are other levels of concern such as potential sources being tapped in the event that the funding mechanisms the bonds were based on were not adequate. When the City makes a waste stream commitment, it is important to consider negotiating a cap on the cost that would be commitment with the number of years that we would be committing to in providing the waste. Council Member Sniff asked what the City would do if the two requirements were not satisfied. Ms. Honeywell advised that the City would be able to attend the LAFCO meeting and object to the formation of the District. She advised that the District could still be formed over the City's objection. Mr. Baker, Principal Planner, advised that the County's Waste Management Director has indicated that both requirements are acceptable. Council Member Sniff asked what exactly the Sanitation District is going to encompass BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 8 February 15, 1994 and do. Mr. Baker advised that the Sanitation District encompasses the unincorporated areas and they are making this last gesture to all the cities to see if they wish to join. The Sanitation District will do exactly the same as the County Waste Management Department, but they will have increased ability to fund certain projects, such as building a MRF and closing landfills. Mayor Pena asked if it would be possible to ask the County to consider setting aside a percentage of the tipping fee to attract companies that use recyclable materials. Mr. Baker stated that he is not familiar with their budget, but we could include that request. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Bangerter/Sniff to authorize e Mayor to sign a letter to Riverside County Board of Supervisors stating the City has no objections to the proposal to form a Sanitation District provided the two identified requirements are satisfied and decline membership in the proposed County Sanitation District and recommend that the County take a certain percentage of their tipping fees LO attract companies who recycle. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9?9. 5. CONSIDERATION OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT REGARDING SANITARY SEWER IN THE INDIAN SPRINGS AREA. Mr. Cosper,. City Engineer, advised that the issue before the Council is the consideration of a Reimbursement Agreement with Coachella Valley Water District CVWD) for sanitary services in the Indian Springs area. CVWD will be constructing a 15- inch sewer line, but they are not proposing to put in the laterals at this time. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Cosper advised that the CVWD is proposing to begin the work in early spring, therefore, July may be too late to incorporate the laterals into their project. He stated hat he would check to see if they would go ahead with the project if the City made a commitment. Mr. Hunt, City Manager, advised that most likely there would not be a payment until next fiscal year, but CVWD needs a commitment from the City so they can move forward with the project. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 9 February 15, 1994 RESOLUTION NO.94-16 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA DETERMINING THAT THE USE OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IS OF PUBLIC BENEFIT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AND DETERMINING THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER REASONABLE MEANS OF FINANCING SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS It was moved by Council Members SnifflMcCartney that Resolution No. 94-16 be adopted as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 6. CONSIDERATION OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY. Mrs. LiCalsi, Personnel & Budget Manager, advised that the Affirmative Action Policy is designed to bring the City into compliance with Federal and State requirements. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the draft policy, and staff has incorporated the changes suggested by the City Council. Council Member McCartney thanked staff for their promptness, for addressing his concerns relating to the grievance procedure, and for incorporating his comments into the policy. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Affirmative Action Policy as presented. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-50. 7. CONSIDERATION OF MIDYEAR BUDGET REPORT. Mr. Hunt, City Manager, commented that outside of the regular budget process, the Midyear Budget Report is the most comprehensive review of the financial status of the City and the StatuS of the Council-authorized activities and projects. He advised that we are cautiously optimistic at midyear. The General Fund has slightly improved thanks to the Council's conservative approach and to the Departments. Staff recommends a continued conservative approach to all City expenditures, and with that in mind, several new appropriations are recommended in midyear which staff believes will provide long- term benefits to the City. He thanked all Department Directors and staff for their efforts, because it is the first highly formalized, structured Midyear Report. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 10 February 15, 1994 Mr. Genovese, Ass't. City Manager, advised that an addendum to the staff report was prepared for the Council to provide clarification of the appropriations. The Midyear Report provides financial assessment and gives the Council an opportunity to review the year?to-date expenditures and revenue, as well as allow for mid-course adjustments based on the modified program requirements. He noted that the General Fund has shown signs of improvement at midyear primarily due to personnel vacancies and minor savings in the operating supplies and expenditures in the budget. Staff recommended a conservative approach throughout the remainder of the fiscal year, noting that it is projected that the revenue will exceed expenditures by approximately $238,000 at the end of the year. He further advised that the revenue and expenditure programs outlined in the budget for the Gas Tax Fund, the Lighting and Landscaping Fund, and the Infrastructure Fund are on schedule. Mr. Genovese stated that the Council is aware of the financial status of the Redevelopment Agency and the steps necessary to ensure the financial success of the position of the Agency. He noted that there are three recommended actions contained in the staff report for Council's consideration. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Hunt advised that the replacement vehicle maintenance schedule will hopefully be addressed in the next budget-year process. He agreed that a long-term maintenance and replacement program needs to be established. Council Member Perkins questioned the striping completed on Washington a few months ago when it was apparent that the Washington and Eisenhower intersection was going to be widened, therefore, requiring restriping. He felt a situation like this is unexcusable, and in order to help conserve funds, it must be carefully watched. Mr. Cosper. City Engineer, advised that it is intended for the contractor to restripe that intersection, as well as Eisenhower and Avenue 50. He advised that the cost of restriping will be covered under the Conditions of Approval for the improvement project. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Hunt advised that December 31, 1993 was the cutoff for the Midyear review. Council Member McCartney asked why the fees for attorney services are only reported up through October. Mr. Hunt advised that the costs shown for attorney fees are through December 31, 1993, BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 11 February 15, 1994 but they are only invoiced through October. By equalizing the expenditures, an assumption can be made that through December 31st the City would have expended approximately 75% of the total appropriation. Ms. Honeywell advised that the cost through December 31st the General City Attorney costs were $87,000. Council Member McCartney stated that the equalization method in most cases would apply, however, based on the City's history of legal battles, an extraordinary expense for the months of November and December could throw that method off. He requested a follow-up within the next couple months and a report submitted to Council on a quarterly basis regarding legal fees. Mayor Pena was hopeful that now the past litigation is over, any on-going litigation should not be anticipated. Council Member Sniff felt that the City has been dealing with abnormal situations making these figures unrepresentative and out of the ordinary. He was hopeful that in the future the City will not be faced with major problems since these significant problems have been solved. Council Member McCartney appreciated the work involved in developing the charts; however, in order to determine where the City currently stands, the summaries have minimal value without a historical bench mark to measure the current figures against. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Hunt advised that the overall appropriations set aside for the purchase of new computer equipment are approximately $200,000. In further response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Hunt advised that staff level committee on computers is recommending uniformity of computer equipment throughout the City. The two minimum specifications recommended by staff are clerical-minimum specifications and drafting- and graphic- minimum specifications. Council Member McCartney asked if a minimum-level purchase is made. can we be certain that we can build on the platforms that are purchased. If it was a matter of an additional $5,000 or $10,000. he wished to move up to the next level of sophistication. Mayor Pena felt that the equipment purchased should be expandable to meet the City's future needs, and if it isn't, we need to look into equipment that is more state-of-the-art. He also asked if computer consultants were contacted. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 12 February 15, 1994 Mr. Hunt clarified what he meant by minimum standards and advised that consultants had not been contacted. Staff used and built upon the study completed in 1992, which they felt was very adequate. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Risley, Accounting Supervisor, advised that he has viewed two softwares. One which was offered by the company we currently use for the System 36, which he felt would not meet the City's needs, and the other was offered by SET which closely resembles the HTE software. He noted that an on-line SUPPOrt with a modem would be factored into the initial cost. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Risley advised that the possibility of leasing the equipment has not been considered. Council Member Perkins wished to have this possibility looked into because too often the most current computer equipment on the market is soon replaced with a better product. In response to Council Member Mccartney, Mr. Risley advised that they did not do an analysis on work stations versus personal computers. Council Member McCartney asked that this also be looked into. He noted that smaller cities and firms are turning to work stations because they are more cost effective. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Risley advised that they did not look into the Macintosh environments for graphics but it could be a possibility because they now have a link to DOS. Mr. Hunt stated that if Council approved the Midyear Budget Report. staff would return with the purchase price and their findings on work stations, leases, etc. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the recommendations of staff as contained in the Midyear Report specifically as follows. First, approve the new appropriations as requested; Second, approve the budget transfers: and Third, approve the proposed personnel actions. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-51. CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Perkins asked that Consent Item No.4 be pulled for discussion. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 1, 1994. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 13 February 15, 1994 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES PUBLIC WORKS OFFICERS INSTITUTE IN SAN DIEGO FROM MARCH 23-25, 1994. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR PERSONNEL AND BUDGET MANAGER AND BUILDING AND SAFETY DIRECTOR TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES LABOR RELATIONS INSTITUTE FROM FEBRUARY 24-25, 1994. 4. APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 27392 A. G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION CO. 5. APPOINTMENT OF CAROLYN LAIR TO THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE. 6. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PASSES TO THE BOB HOPE CHRYSLER CLASSIC FROM KSL, INC. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with the exception of Item No.4 being pulled for discussion and Item No.6 being adopted by RESOLUTION NO.94-17. Council Member McCartney asked that Consent Item No.6 also be pulled due to a conflict of interest. Council Member Sniff withdrew his motion. MOTION I? was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with the exception of Item Nos. 4 and 6. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-52. Relative to Item No.4, Council Member Perkins asked if the City has fully pursued and reviewed commercial ordinances and if they protect the City against the building of extreme heights, screening, etc. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that when a development is proposed on a parcel, the zoning regulations dealing with regulatory issues are applied. He noted that as a part of the Zoning Ordinance update, the zoning regulations will be reviewed to ensure that they are in compliance with the General Plan. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve Consent Item No.4 as recommended. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE? ORDER NO.94-53. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 14 February 15, 1994 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Hangerter/Sniff that Consent Item No. 6 be adopted by RESOLUTION NO. 9?17. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member McCartney abstaining. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-54. STUDY SESSION FOLLOW-UP ON HIGHWAY 111 PLANNING AND DESIGN, AND CONSULTATION SELECTION PROCESS/MEETING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that on January 27, 1994, the Planning Department met with the owners of property along Highway 111. It was staff's intent to review the proposal presented to the City Council in December relative to creating the Highway 111 Design Guidelines dealing with the frontage of Highway 111 and building architectural treatment. He advised that it was the consensus of those in attendance to create an assessment district to install the improvements along Highway 111, Avenue 48, Adams, and Dune Palms, rather than at this point in tirne create another design document. Upon request by the property owners, the preliminary costs will be analyzed by the Engineering Department at which time a letter will be sent to each property owner to see if they are still interested. If the assessment district is supported, then an assessment engineer would be hired to establish the boundaries of the future benefit district. He noted that the assessment district may be confined to the Highway 111 property owners or it may go beyond the bounds of the current commercial zoning based upon the benefit district. Staff's recommendation is to proceed with determining preliminary costs and participation and report back to Council with the outcome of the letter to determine the next step. Council Member Perkins was pleased that the property owners are considering an assessment district. In further response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that those in attendance at the meeting, represented more than 50% of the land mass on Highway 111 in the commercial area. In response to Mayor Pena, Chris Clarke, owner of property along Highway 111, felt that those in attendance at the meeting believed that the biggest obstacle affecting them was that there is no Reimbursement Agreement within the City and it is extremely expensive for the owner of a 20-acre parcel to move forward. They would like the money invested in the infrastructure and the utilities instead of a design concept at this point in time, because this is what is holding up every property owner. She noted that the property owners have already contacted Stone and Youngberg, because they wish to BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 15 February 15, 1994 incorporate other benefit areas, also. In that way, everyone bears the fair share of the infrastructure. Mayor Pena was very encouraged by the interest shown from the property owners and desired to move forward. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that the creation of an assessment district is to install the improvements for future construction, noting that it is not for design guidelines. Joe Hammer, Hammer Ranch, southwest corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms, stated that he would most likely support the assessment district if he knew the cost and the area the district encompassed. He felt, overall, that the Highway 111 Corridor would develop quickly and benefit the entire City. He also expressed concern about the possible dangers at Dune Palms Road if a light is not installed when the High School is completed. Mayor Pena commented that the School District currently owns approximately 40 acres and asked if they would be exempt if they were included in the boundaries of the district. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, believed that the City could not force them to be a part of the district, as the City could not condition the development of the High School. Mayor Pena suggested discussing?this with them because it will also benefit them. Council Member Sniff was also pleased with the interest expressed by the property owners. He believed that the bulk of the City's future lies on Highway 111. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Herman advised that the improvements traditionally encompassed in an assessment district includes streets, sidewalks, sewers, water, signals, utilities, etc. Council Member Sniff agreed to the formation of an assessment, however, a conceptual design of the area such as location of utilities and streets are also an integral part of the process and needs to be addressed. Mr. Herman advised that the placement of through streets separating larger parcels could be undertaken as part of the study of the assessment district. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised the proposed design guidelines would be discussed in the future. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 16 February 15, 1994 Tom Murphy, property owner on Highway 111, stated that he has spoken with a number of the property owners and they are 100% for this project. He commented that they have the acreage to carry the 60% vote to make the assessment district. He noted that there are good construction costs and low long-term interest rates available for financing. Losing the time frame may greatly increase the cost over the number of years on the loan. He felt it is very important not to piece meal this project, but complete it as a whole. He stated that the Highway 111 property owners feel that if the whole plan is reviewed, then all of the benefitted properties would be included. He strongly recommended that the City move forward quickly. Council Member Bangerter agreed and believed that the Council needs to be very sensitive to the financial arrangements that can now be made. She felt that what the property owners are willing to do is incredible, therefore, time is of the essence and this should not be held back for any reason. Council Member Perkins expressed his excitement about government and the private sector coming together in mutual benefit to La Quinta as a whole. He wished to move forward rapidly and thanked the property owners for their support. Council Member McCartney asked how rapidly we could move toward the formation of an assessment district. Ms. Honeywell advised that when an assessment district is being created, it is necessary to tie it in with the County assessments, as with Assessment District V. She believed if we start now, it could possibly be formed by July, 1994; so that it can be placed on the 1994/95 tax roll. Council Member McCartney asked that staff present an outline of events which need to occur in order to make that date at the next Council meeting. Mayor Pena also suggested that the letters have a designated date as when we want their responses returned so we can move forward from there. Council Member Perkins suggested that an interest letter be sent out immediately and then a letter be sent out with the preliminary costs. Mr. Murphy cornmented that he has been given an estimated cost of $15 to $20 million. but what the property owner needs to know is the benefit district and what percentage of it is theirs. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 17 February 15, 1994 DEPARTMENT REPORTS Mrs. Juhola, City Clerk, advised that Council's luncheon with the Boys and Girls Club is scheduled for March 1st; a location yet to be determined. Mrs. Juhola advised that the recent lunch at the YMCA Youth Center there was some informal discussion about recognizing some of the local businesses that make contributions to local organizations on a regular basis. She pointed out that in the past a community spirit award has been given to individuals who have contributed to the community over and above and asked if the Council wishes to pursue such an idea. Council expressed a desire to recognize these businesses and asked the City Clerk to return with some recommendations. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS Mayor Pena advised that the La Quinta Historical Society Museum was dedicated this past Sunday and encouraged everyone to visit the museum. The Council recessed to the Redevelopment Agency meeting. CLOSED SESSION 1. Discussion of negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 a. Midland Properties Proposal for commercial development at the approximate corner of Jefferson and Highway 111. 2. Discussion of personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 a. Personnel scheduling. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 18 February 15, 1994 7:00 P.M. PRESENTATIONS Mayor Pena presented the following individuals with plaques expressing the City's appreciation for their service on the Design Review Board: Paul Anderson, Jim Campbell not present), John Curtis, Dave Harbison, Fred Rice, and Randall Wright Mayor Pena also presented Meg Robertson not present) with a plaque expressing the City's appreciation for her service on the Art in Public Places Committee. PUBLIC COMMENT None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION NO.9 LAFCO NO.93-35-4) TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO THE LA QUINTA LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 89-i AND CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM THE SOUTHERN COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT. Mr. Herman. Planning Director, advised that the annexation in question consists of 1,917 acres located south of Avenue 60, west of Madison and north of Avenue 64. He noted that there are three actions being requested of the Council: 1) annexation of the subject property to the City; 2) concurrent annexation to the City's Landscape and Lighting District 89-1 and 3) detaching subject property from the Southern Coachella Valley Community Services District. Subject annexation was approved by LAFCO on December 9th and the City has 92% in support. He further advised that the arLrlexation consists of 77 parcels with a total of 2,547.60 acres with a total assessed valuation of $3,658,022.00. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Herman advised that the subject annexation is one section to the south of PGA West one mile). The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 19 February 15, 1994 RESOLUTION NO.94-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED CONTIGUOUS TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, AND INCLUDING A CONCURRENT ANNEXATION TO THE CITY'S LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1, AND CONCURRENT DETACH? FROM THE SOUTHERN COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, KNOWN AS ANNEXATION #9. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins that Resolution No 94 18 be adopted Motion carried unanimously. 2. SPECIFIC PLAN #87-009, AMENDMENT #3 TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERIM AND PERMANENT CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES AROUND THE VILLAGE PARK. Mayor Pena and Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter abstained from this issue due to conflicts of interests and left the meeting at this time. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that in October 1993, the Council directed staff to develop a one-way system, On a trial implementation basis, around the park. This action requires an amendment to the Specific Plan. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the amendment on January 25, 1994 and voted 4-1 to recommend approval of Amendment #3. Mr. Herman advised that the amendment allows flexibility to allow interim circulation improvements around the park. The amendment has been routed to various agencies and their responses are contained in the staff report on file in the City Clerk's office. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that if Council wishes to make other modifications at the end of the six-month trial period, this amendment would permit that. In response to Council Member Mccartney, Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the Alternative under consideration was the least expensive because it required the least amount of right-of-way acquisition, if any. He then proceeded to briefly review the other three alternatives. Council Member Sniff, Presiding Officer, declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 20 February 15, 1994 James Belknap, 73-300 Fiddleneck Lane, asked what the reasoning is for making this change. Mr. Cosper advised that the Public Works Department looked at the intersections to make sure that they provided safe access and that the circulation plan meets the current needs in and around the park. All four of the plans submitted to the Council met those criteria. The primary concern was getting traffic off of Eisenhower to the roads surrounding the park. Mr. Belknap advised that he was opposed to one-way streets around the park. Audrey Ostrowsky, P.O. Box 351, La Quinta, asked that the Council delay this action for further study. She reviewed a plan which was prepared by a French architect who suggested the following changes: 1. Extend the park area further to Eisenhower with painted lines on the street; 2. A stop sign on the north side of Montezuma with a right-turn only 3. Don't rush into a decision tonight and don't proceed without conducting a traffic study. This architect's opinion was that one-way traffic wasn't warranted and would be detrimental to the commercial property. She questioned who made the deterrnination that the downtown is a pedestrian area, as she didn't see it as such. Rupert Yessaylan, P.O. Box 251, La Quinta, was opposed to one-way traffic around the park. He felt that the two Council Members who are abstaining from voting should be able to vote, or else the matter should go to a vote of the people. He stated that The Village Plan was carefully thought-out and there needs to be continuity in government. He felt that safety is a non-issue as there has never been a fatality around the park area. He also believed that one-way would be confusing as cars parking would cut across the bike path. Many people and organizations are opposed to one-way streets because it would be confusing, not safe and in The Village style. There being no one else wishing to speak, the PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Council Member Perkins advised that he has spent a great deal of time studying this project and felt that some are forgetting the reason for this amendment, which is the intersection of Eisenhower and Montezuma, which is going to become busier than it is now. He challenged the concept that one-way streets preclude the development of property, which is not backed up by results in other cities. The Council is looking at a BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 P City Council Minutes 21 February 15, 1994 one-way street system on a six-month trial basis and if it doesn't work Out, then it can be changed. The fact that it has been two-way for a long-time and that there hasn't been a fatality, doesn't eliminate the fact that it's a dangerous situation. He appreciated the time and effort the people have put into this issue and the fact that there are a number of people opposed to one-way streets. However, based on his experience and knowledge of traffic, one-way streets is the proper way to proceed on the basis of a six-month trial period. Council Member McCartney agreed with many of Council Member Perkins' comments and reemphasized the point about safety. The fact that there hasn't been a fatality around the park does not mean that safety isn't a problem. This is a growing City and more and more people are using the park area. From his perspective, he felt that we need to look strongly at the issue of safety and that in this instance, the one-way around the park is a safer alternative than the others that have been under study and presented. Also, he pointed out that this action is being proposed on an interim basis and that it won't cost the City anything to find Out if it does work. He felt that it has good practical sense. He then asked the City Attorney to comment on the conflict of interest by Mayor Pena and Council Member Bangerter. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that they both either own property or operate a business within 300' of this proposed project and there's a presumption of conflict that the FPPC has set-out. They would have to be able to prove that there is no economic impact either positive or negative to their property in order to participate. By participating with a conflict would invalidate the action taken and the FPPC could decide to prosecute if they found that the Officials knowingly participated. Council Member Sniff reviewed the history of the downtown and park area. He was concerned about the property owners and about safety as he wasn't convinced that a one- way street is safer than a two-way street. He believed that accessibility to a person's property can affect the value of it and its flinction. He felt that the intersection of Eisenhower and Montezuma needs to be addressed and modified. If that can be done at a minimal cost and still have two-way traffic around the park, that should be done. To change streets from two-way to one-way requires some education and possibly six-months for people to get used to it. If there is any risk here, it's in making this a one-way street it's a radical departure. That area was designed in 1932 as two-way street and it's been two-way for 62 years and the motorists and pedestrians are used to a two-way street. He wished to see the alternative where the two-way streets are maintained and modify the intersection of Montezuma and Eisenhower. He thought that the comments made by the Sheriff's Department had relevance dealing with the possibility of a stop sign and illumination at that intersection. Council Member Perkins referred to the letter from the Sheriff's Office and quoted from the letter in which they state that the proposed design appears workable with the BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02 PCity Council Minutes 22 February 15, 1994 intersection of Eisenhower/Montezuma being made a four-way stop; installation of directional and speed limit signs; situating the bicycle lane next to the park; and consideration to east-west traffic visibility if parking is allowed behind the Parkside Plaza. Regarding accessibility, almost the entire length on both sides of Montezuma' there's an alley-way with two-way traffic. The fact that it's been two-way for 62 years is not a factor as conditions change. He concluded that his safety concern is for the intersection of Eisenhower/Montezuma because if there's two-way traffic around the park, we'll end up with a five-way intersection as opposed to a four-way. RESOLUTION NO.94-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS, CONFIRMING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA SP 87-009, AMENDMENT #3), MAKING MINOR ThXT ADDITIONS TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN. SPECIFIC PLAN 87-009 VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA, AMENDMENT #3. It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Mccartney that Resolution No.94-19 be adopted as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member Sniff voting NO and with Mayor Pena and Council Member Bangerter absent. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins/McCartney to direct staff to implement Alternative A" one-way circulation scenario) on a six-month interim basis. Motion carried with Council Member Sniff voting NO and with Mayor Pena and Council Member Bangerter absent. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-55. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned upon motion by Council Members Mccartneylperkins and carried unanimously. AUNDRA L. 3 OLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California BIB] 01-13-96-U01 11:51:08AM-U01 CCMIN021594-U02