Loading...
1994 09 20 CC Minutes& LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 20, 1994 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on September 20, 1994 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, Mccartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena ABSENT: None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Mayor Pena requested that Public Hearing Items Nos. 2, 3 and 4 be moved ahead of Public Hearing Item No.1. He also requested that the written correspondence regarding Lia Gilbert's resignation from the Arts in Public Places Committee be added to the agenda as Business Item No.14. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, requested that Consent Calendar Item No. 10 be moved to Business Item No.15. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to add the items to the agenda as they came up after the agenda was prepared. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9?191. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Mccartney to approve the City Council Minutes of August 2, 1994 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of August 16, 1994 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member McCartney abstaining MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of September 6, 1994 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member McCartney abstaining. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Pena announced that the public hearing regarding The Pairings" would be held at 7:00 p.m., not 3:00p.m. as stated in error by The Desert Sun. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 2 September 20, 1994 PRESENTATIONS Mayor Pena presented Marni Francisco, Recreation Supervisor, with a plaque expressing the City's appreciation for being chosen Employee of the Month for the month of August. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. John Lavendar, Vice President of Waste Management of the Desert, announced that Kermit Martin, formerly of Southern California Edison, is now Manager of Governmental Affairs for Waste Management of the Desert. Mr. Wally Reynolds, 79-860 Fiesta Drive, expressed appreciation to the City for the completion of the street improvements in the Westward Ho area and hoped that sewers, curbs and gutters would be added in the near future. He also noted that traffic congestion in that area has gotten worse due to the new high school traffic and asked Staff to monitor it. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE a. Letter from David Chigos, Ph.D, LL.D., regarding a name change of Avenue 50 to 1Frank Capra b. Letter from City of Desert Hot Springs regarding CVJPIA's decision to DHS vs Silver Sage. C. Letter from Lia Gilbert resigning from the Art in Public Places Committee. Note: this item was added to the agenda as Business Item No.14.) MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins?Sm.ff to receive and file Correspondence Items a & b. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-192. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING NEW COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY PRACTICES FOR MULTI-CHANNEL SERVICE PROVIDERS. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that the purpose of the multi-channel service provider ordinance is to regulate all multi-channel service providers within the City. A minimum of 25 hours has been spent with Colony CableVision. the City's current cable franchise provider, and many of their concerns have been addressed through revisions BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 3 September 20, 1994 in the proposed ordinance. She stated that Staff didn't necessarily think that the original ordinance was not preferable, but rather was attempting to accommodate Colony's concerns. She introduced Municon's representatives, Michael Hunt and Larry Monroe. Mr. Michael Hunt, President and Counsel for Municon Corporation, the City's cable consultant, advised that the legal opinion letter received from Colony CableVision asserts that the proposed ordinance is a violation of federal and state law. He advised that the proposed regulatory ordinance is much different than a franchise agreement. A franchise agreement is a bi-lateral agreement requiring uniformity of both parties, in terms of conditions and provisions therein. A City may draft a regulatory ordinance for the purpose of regulating operations within that City. A regulatory ordinance should not unnecessarily, or unfairly, affect the contractual franchising process with an operator. The proposed ordinance has been drafted to dampen any such potential and it does not affect the current operator until the franchise agreement expires or until a new franchise agreement is signed. An operator also has the option of requesting relief from any and all provisions of the regulatory ordinance. There are areas in which relief can be requested such as: an ordinance contradicts federal law; the operator has a comparable policy; implementation would be too costly or burdensome; or the best interest in local government could better be served otherwise. He believed Colony was attempting to cover some of these issues up front by way of changes within the ordinance rather than asking for relief within the franchise agreement. The ordinance is not intended to be operator specific, but rather will affect all operators, now and in the future and as new technology is introduced, the ordinance will provide a basis for regulation. It also will prevent charges of discrimination by any operator. Mr. Michael Isaacs, Vice President of Government Affairs & Public Policy of Providence Journal, 75 Fountain Street, Providence, Rhode Island, counsel for Waste Management of the Desert, advised that he disagreed with Mr. Hunt's characterization of Colony's opinion of the process and the legal opinion letter provided to the City. He believed Colony's legal opinion letter, prepared by the law firm of Robbins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, does not question the City's adoption of an ordinance, but rather it addresses two specific sections of the ordinance. Colony CableVision asked their law firm to draft the legal opinion because they believed these two sections of the ordinance allows the City to unilaterally amend the franchise obligations at any time in the future. He advised that the cable franchise agreement process is always a negotiating process. The obligations that a cable franchisee undertakes are generally presented in two different documents a franchise ordinance which applies to all providers and the specific franchise agreement which is the contract between the City and the franchisee. It is appropriate to have both documents adopted simultaneously and as part of the negotiation process, so that everyone understands the ground-rules. One of their objections to the draft ordinance was the provision that the ordinance always controls, rather than the franchise agreement, thereby resulting in a long and protracted process in seeking exceptions to regulatory provisions in the ordinance. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 4 September 20, 1994 He believed that the proposed ordinance purports to regulate entities that the City has no jurisdiction over because these entities are licensed by the Federal Communications Commission FCC) and regulation is preempted by the Communications Act and FCC rules. Practically, the proposed ordinance only regulates cable companies such as Colony CableVision. He noted that the District of Columbia's U.S. Court of Appeals recently held that telephone companies providing video dial tone service are not required to have a franchise agreement. Colony does support a broad ordinance that will regulate telephone companies providing cable service, but believed there are limitations on the City's authority which the proposed ordinance purports to regulate. Mayor Pena asked Mr. Isaacs to confirm that the federal government might allow the cities to have jurisdiction in the future where they restrict it presently. Mr. Isaacs confirmed Mayor Pena's statement, but believed it is more probable that regulations will become regulated more on the federal and state level, as opposed to allowing more local regulation. Mr. Hunt concurred that the FCC is going to regulate PCS but noted that other communities, such as New York City, are regulating PCS and MMDS. He stated that the City's ordinance should be the controlling document and not a negotiated franchise agreement. The proposed ordinance is a regulatory ordinance that provides the City unilateral decision power just as any other City ordinance. Mr. Larry Monroe, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Municon, advised that Federal Cable Act Sections 632 and 634 specifically permit regulation of multi-channel service providers. The proposed ordinance is not operator specific but covers all multi- channel service providers and could have significant ramifications in some areas such as joint ventures between telephone and cable companies. In cases where a telephone company buys out a cable company the telephone company is not liable to stand by a franchise agreement claiming to be predominately telephony and therefore, the City loses control. He noted that the cable industry has acknowledged that should telephone companies, outside the context of video dial tone, be allowed to operate without a franchise as multi-channel service providers, the NCTA anticipates the filing of legal charges of discriminatory treatment, for regulating one provider with a franchise more than another provider of the same service, in that you may not regulate one provider of a franchise effectively to any greater extent than another provider of the same service. The regulatory ordinance assures the City's rights and ability to protect the public's interest. Current proposed federal legislation could preempt City authority under current franchise agreements, but historically there is grandfathering" language which would grandfather-in existing regulatory situations. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Monroe advised that private areas gated communities) may use a different cable provider than the public uses, noting that BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 5 September 20,1994 exclusive franchises are not permissible in the public arena. Regarding cost of service, in PGA West there is 100% penetration, so the cable provider is able to offer a bundle of service at a lesser cost than the general public is paying. If that the proposed ordinance could regulate the vast majority of activities of such an operator, even though they are on private property, vis-a-vis, all of the customer service issues, consumer protection issues, safety related issues, etc. Mr. Steve Merritt, General Manager of Colony CableVision, 41-725 Cook Street Palm Desert, advised that Colony is not opposed to the regulation of multi-channel service providers. However, the ordinance contains provisions within it that they could not agree to during renegotiations because of their concern about the legality. They preferred to address these issues before the ordinance is adopted, as opposed to addressing them in a piecemeal" fashion. He stated that Colony's intent is not to tailor? the ordinance to their operation, but advised that some of the provisions in the ordinance will affect them greatly and immediately, as well as in the franchise renewal process. Mr. Larry Monroe, advised that contractual relationships are subservient to applicable regulatory law. Federal and State laws change regularly and impose significant operational requirements upon an operator, just as local law may. It's coincidental that in this case, the City serves as both the regulator, as well as a party to the franchise. He read excerpts from the Federal Cable Act, reiterating the City's right to regulate customer service and consumer protection. The proposed ordinance has a specific provision within it to allow a provider to request relief or comparable practice. He felt it isn't practical to impose regulations upon an operator if it's going to have a significant impact on the subscribers' pocket-book. Council Member Bangerter asked if the current ordinances of Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert affect Colony CableVision in the same way that La Quinta's proposed ordinance will affect them. Mr. Isaacs believed that those ordinances are written differently. He reiterated Colony's position that they are not challenging the ordinance, but are only concerned with Sections 5.10.730(D) and 5.10. 110(A)(B). Colony is asking for changes to the ordinance that, if adopted, would allow the City to unilaterally change obligations of the service providers that would increase their expenditures. Council Member Bangerter advised that she was referring to these same two specific sections when asking if the other cities' ordinances include these same regulations. Mr. Merritt responded that they are completely different. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Merritt advised that Colony has chosen to use the cable band width' to provide more video channels instead of FM reception. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 6 September 20, 1994 To be competitive they will again consider providing FM service after rebuilding their system and expanding their band width". In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Merritt advised that the City of Palm Desert's ordinance was adopted in 1983 prior to the Policy Act of 1984. The City of Rancho Mirage's ordinance was adopted in 1992 before the Cable Television Consumer Protection Act was passed, but it was substantially complete prior to the law going into effect. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Merritt advised that Colony mailed notices regarding the cancellation of FM service as required by law. He advised that their franchise agreement does not require them to furnish FM service but rather reads it may be provided Council Member Sniff believed that the ordinances of Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage are not relevant due to the year in which they were adopted. He suggested that the proposed ordinance be adopted and let the providers request relief through the provision in the ordinance which allows such relief upon justification. He believed adoption of the ordinance was imperative to allow the City to deal effectively in the future with any multi-channel service provider. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Merritt reiterated that Colony is not in opposition to a regulatory ordinance, but prefers to have one that is easier to administrate and would like to have their two specific concerns addressed. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Monroe advised that in addition to cable television, other multi-channel service providers are: Multi-Channel Distribution Service MDS), a service provider to an apartment complex; Multi-Point & Multi-Channel Distribution Service MMDS), same as MDS but the signal is delivered over the air, usually through microwave technology; and numerous telephone companies that have purchased cable compames. Mr. Monroe explained that a video dial tone service is a third party that packages programming and leases capacity on the telephone company's common carrier system to distribute programming. A franchise cannot be required of phone companies or video dial tone services but they are still subject to regulations. Council Member Sniff asked the City Attorney to confirm the importance in enacting a regulatory ordinance as soon as possible because of the upcoming renegotiations with Colony CableVision's franchise agreement as well as being prepared for any new service providers that may come into the City. Ms. Honeywell concurred with Council Member Sniff, adding that there are proposed new federal regulations that could impact the City, some of which may recognize grandfathering" of existing local regulatory ordinances. To preserve the greatest BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 7 September 20, 1994 amount of control given in the 1992 Cable Act, she recommended adoption of the ordinance as soon as possible. Council Member McCartney agreed that the ordinance should be enacted as soon as possible. He believed the main purposes of the ordinance is to insure that subscribers have a quality picture and reliable service. He questioned why a requirement to train and educate Customer service personnel was removed from the ordinance in Section 5.10.300, since customer service is an important part of the regulations. Council Member Sniff asked if this issue could be dealt with under franchise agreements. Mr. Monroe advised that minimum standards cannot be enforced if not addressed in the ordinance. Ms. Honeywell and Mr. Monroe advised that Section 5.10.300 was removed from the ordinance in an effort to accommodate some of Colony CableVision's concerns. Mr. Monroe suggested that the language be added back into the ordinance and grant Colony relief if no problem exists with them. Council Member Mccartney questioned why the ordinance does not require the service provider to keep a master log of 100% of telephone inquires. Mr. Monroe advised that there are automatic phone systems available that will log all incoming calls and noted that Colony CableVision has one. Ms. Honeywell advised that the proposed ordinance requires that records be kept for investigations that require on-site investigation only, as opposed to the original draft which required all inquires to be logged. Council Member McCartney requested the original language be returned to the ordinance, requiring all inquires to be logged so that performance and standards can be measured. Mr. Merritt stated that Colony knows 100% of their incoming calls, but calls regarding requests for today's programming" or billing explanation inquires are not logged. A requirement to log all calls would be extremely costly. Colony is able to track" all calls through a computer system, but 100% logging is not done on a master list. If no action is taken on a call, then it isn't logged. Mr. Monroe advised that this issue is not a problem with Colony, but is needed within the ordinance because of other service providers with whom the problem could exist. He suggested that if cost to implement is a problem for the service provider, then other avenues could be agreed to that would accomplish the same desired effect. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 8 September 20.1994 Council Member McCartney advised that there will be costs involved to implement this new ordinance and to monitor performance. He believed the MCS's one-percent allowance for error on the year-end audit should be reduced, noting the importance of accurate records. He suggested that the provider be required to pay for the audit if it is off by more than $1.00. Mr. Isaacs advised that Colony would have to ask for exceptions within their franchise regarding some of the issues under discussion. If the provider's cost is increased due to mandated changes, those costs will have to be passed on to the subscriber. He suggested some of the changes may not be worth the cost. He believed that the City should adopt regulatory standards, but should allow the operator to determine the way in which those standards are met. He stated that franchise fees are intended to cover certain regulatory costs and he questioned whether the inclusion of audit costs was within the limitations of franchise fees in the Cable Act. Franchise fees are limited to five percent of the gross revenues of a company and certain other expenses that a company is forced to incur are offset against those franchise fees under the Cable Act. Council Member Sniff suggested the one-percent tolerance be changed to a half-percent. Mr. Monroe noted that in five years a half-percent will be significantly higher than it is today. He expressed confidence in being able to deal with Colony on all the issues, but felt that the regulations within the ordinance are important to deal effectively with new providers. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Monroe advised that the ordinance requires adequate" training. He suggested that a provision could be made in a franchise agreement to allow the City to certify training upon request" in cases where the City felt comfortable with that provision, but might want to definitely require it with other operators. Mayor Pena concurred with Mr. Monroe noting that the time requirement could vary from operator to operator. Mr. Isaacs suggested that the wording upon request" be placed directly into the ordinance rather than in the franchise agreement. Council Member McCartney asked why Section 5.10.270(E) was deleted regarding printing of materials in another language. Mr. Isaacs advised that it is the wording of ten percent of residents" that is confising does it mean subscribers? He suggested that the policy read to require the operator to provide notices in the language that the City provides its notices." BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 9 September 20, 1994 Council Member McCar:ney believed that Colony exceeds many of the minimum standards outlined in the ordinance. His concern was setting minimum standard requirements for all providers. He believed at good customer service is built on communication, making the understanding of printed materials an important issue. Council Member Perkins suggested that the ordinance be adopted and revisions made at a later date if necessary. Council Member Sniff concurred and asked if the changes in language suggested by Council Member McCartney should be incorporated. Council Member McCartney noted the modifications agreed upon were: 1) the inclusion of Section 5.10.300, relative to training, changing the wording to allow the City to certify the training upon request 2) change the error-tolerance level from one percent to a half?percent on the audit; 3) clarification that service logs are to include all sefl?ice requests. He requested that the ordinance also provide for an emergency channel. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Merritt advised that Colony CableVision has an emergency override system which will allow emergency broadcasting over all channels simultaneously, providing the individual has emergency power to operate their television. Council Member McCartney suggested that a quality control committee be appointed and suggested that the function be given to the Human Services Commission. Mayor Pena concurred and suggested they review it on a periodic basis. Ms. Honeywell suggested that the committee structure should be handled separately from the ordinance. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to take up Ordinance No. 255 by title and number only and waive further reading. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE NO.255 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING CHAPTER 5.10 OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPLACING THE PRIOR CHAPTER WITH A NEW CHAPTER 5.10, ADOPTING NEW COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY PRACTICES FOR MULTI-CHANNEL SERVICE PROVIDERS INCLUDING THOSE PROVIDERS KNOWN AS CABLE OPERATORS, AND INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR INSURANCE, REPORTS AND RECORDS, CONSUMER PRACTICES, CONSUMER PROTECTION MEASURES, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION-RELATED PRACTICES, FRANCHISE FEES AND ALTERNATIVE USER CHARGES, RATE REGULATION PROVISIONS FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND ASSOCIATED CHARGES, OPERATION PROCEDURES, AND HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE MEASURES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 10 September 20, 1994 It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to introduce Ordinance No.255 as amended on first reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Mccartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 2. CONSIDERATION OF FY 1994-95 COMMUNITY SERVICES GRANT APPLICATIONS. Council Member Bangerter abstained from this issue due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Bohlen, Parks and Recreation Director, advised that the procedures for the Community Services grant program was established by Council on June 7, 1994. On July 5, 1994 staff presented a request from the Community Concerts of La Quinta and the Council then moved up the deadline for the applications from September 19th to September 6th. Notices of that change were mailed out with applications to possible grant applicants. He advised that the screening committee has reviewed the applications. Council Member Sniff noted that $1,500 of the originally allocated $40,000 has already been spent and felt that it's imperative to set aside between $8,500 and $10,000 for Council's discretionary use in the future. MOTION It was moved by Council Member Sniff and seconded by Mayor Pena to reserve a sum of at least $8,500, maximum of $10,000 from the original allocated $40,000, as a Council contingency fund for future discretionary use. Council Member Sniff believed that a contingency fund is important because of other worthy causes that request funding assistance throughout the fiscal year. He explained the reason for the $8,500 to $10,000 variance is to give latitude for making decisions on the current grant requests. Mayor Pena supported a $10,000 contingency fund to allow the City to grant funds to other worthy causes that might be submitted throughout the remainder of the year and expressed regret that the City is unable to grant the full amounts requested in these applications as they are all worthy causes. Council Member Perkins suggested that the largest requests be reduced to bring the overall total down to be more in line with the amount being suggested and then divide the balance on a percentage basis. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 11 September 20, 1994 Council Member Sniff did not agree with handling the requests on a prorata basis. Council Member McCartney concurred with the motion. Motion carried with Council Member Bangerter absent. MINUTE ORDER NO.94- 193. The Council then reviewed each of the grant applications with Council expressing philosophical views on specific applications. MOTION It was moved by Council Members McCartneylSniff to appropriate the Community Services Grant funds as follows: Organization Name Amount of Grant Boys & Girls Club $3,500 Family YMCA Child Care La Quinta 3,500 Friends of the La Quinta Senior Center 5,000 Friends of the La Quinta Library 3,500 Community Concerts of La Quinta 4,000 La Quinta Historical Society 2,500 C. V. Child Care Council 5,000 Adams-Truman Earthquake Committee 1,000 AYSO of La Quinta 500 Round Table West 1,500 PD/LQ Football Conference 1,000 Children's Theatre 500 Palm Springs Int'l Film Festival 0 Total $31,500 Mr. Bohlen advised that the Council had previously approved an allocation from this fund of $1,500 and therefore, if the motion is approved the balance in the contingency fund will be $7,000 and not the minimum amount of $8,500 required by the previous motion. Motion was withdrawn. Council reviewed the amounts previously allocated and made revisions to those amounts. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 12 September 20, 1994 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to appropriate the Community Services Grant funds as follows. Organization Name Amount Granted Boys & Girls Club $3,500 Family YMCA Child Care La Quinta 3,500 Friends of the La Quinta Senior Center 4,000 Friends of the La Quinta Library 3,500 Community Concerts of La Quinta 4,000 La Quinta Historical Society 2,500 C. V. Child Care Council 4,000 Adams-Truman Fartliquake Committee 1,000 AYSO of La Quinta 500 Round Table West 1,500 PD/LQ Football Conference 1,000 Children's Theatre 500 Palm Springs Int'l Film Festival 0 Total $29,500 Motion carried with Council Member Bangerter absent. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9? 194. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Ms. Myra Bohenberger, City's representative for Riverside City and County Library Advisory Board, gave a brief annual report on the library services in La Quinta. She advised that an average of 14 children and 6 adults had attended the 11 pre-school storytime sessions with an average of 42 children and 15 adults attending the family storytime sessions. She expressed appreciation to the City Council, the Friends of the La Quinta Library, presenters of donations and the many volunteers who have helped make the La Quinta Library programs successful. She introduced Barbara Cousins, the La Quinta Library Branch Manager. Ms. Barbara Cousins, advised that Riverside County Library system has a Book Break Program that encourages children to read by supplying them a passport" to be stamped each time they check out a book and each child is rewarded upon completion of reading four books. There were 390 children enrolled in the program during the last year. She expressed appreciation to the Council for the Community Services grants allocated to the Friends of the La Quinta Library. She requested the Council to continue supporting the Library by supporting State & County legislation that secures library funding. They wish to establish new programs at the library such as a homework assistance" program where volunteers assist students with reference information as well as an electronic encyclopedia to provide more up-to-date information. She also hoped that the Council would consider construction of a new library building as a high priority. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 13 September 20, 1994 Mayor Pena expressed appreciation for the dedication and hard work that both library representatives have given to the community. In response to Council Member McCartney Ms. Cousins advised that donated books become the property of the facility to whom they are donated. Council recessed to Closed Session until the hour of 7:00 p.tn. CLOSED SESSION 1. Conlerence with Real Property Negotiator Tim Ealey southwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street Midland Properties negotiations for proposal lor commercial development including price, term of payment pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8. 2. Conference with Labor Negotiator Tom Hartung regarding negotiations with the La Quinta City Employees Association pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 Meet and Confer Process. 3. Conference with Attorney re: potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 pursuant to threat or litigation re: Starlight Dunes Project. 7:00 P.M. BUSINESS SESSION..........Continued 3. CONSWERATION OF AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF MILES AVENUE AND DUNE PALMS ROAD. Mayor Pena referred to the staff report which advised that a potential traffic safety hazard exists at the intersection of Dune Palms Road and Miles Avenue. Parents have expressed concern for the safety of their children in route to the new high school. The concern involves a perceived lack of sight distance for eastbound motorists on Miles Avenue caused by a hump in the road weSt of Dune Palms Road. Parents are concerned that eastbound motorists will not have adequate time to react to children crossing Miles Avenue at Dune Palms Road. According to the sight-distance criteria in the California Highway Design Manual there does not appear to be a sight restriction at this intersection. A study was undertaken regarding installation of a traffic signal and the intersection failed all warrant tests. However, with the new high school and the latest BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 14 September 20, 1994 phase of the Topaz Development, warrants should be met within three to six months. Therefore, staff recommended appropriation of $150,000 in infrastructure funds for design and construction of the signals. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve an appropriation of $150,000 of infrastructure funds for the traffic signal improvement at Dune Palms Road and Miles Avenue. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, asked if there were any other alternatives other than a four-way stop or traffic signal intersection, noting the cost involved and the numerous traffic signals in the area. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that staff has reviewed the two alternatives and recommended the traffic signals. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that 25 percent of the cost is anticipated to be paid by the City of Indio. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-195. 4. CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS TO ADAMS STREET\WHITEWATER CHANNEL CROSSING PROPERTY. Mayor Pena referred to the staff report which stated that the City of La Quinta and the Desert Sands Unified School District DSUSD) entered into a Cooperative Agreement on April 19, 1994 to design and construct the Whitewater River Channel crossings for Adams Street and Dune Palms Road with an intended completion date of September 8, 1994. In May 1994, CVWD informed staff of invert stabilizer requirements to the crossings that added additional costs of $250,000 to each crossing. Due to funding restraints and the September 8th deadline, staff chose to complete the design for the Adams Street crossing and delay designing of the Dune Palms Road crossing until funding is available. Because of new Federal policies requiring the City to receive permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Fish and Game, the encroachment permit was not issued by CVWD until September 16, 1994. The DSUSD negotiated a contract change order with the high school-construction contractor to construct the Adams Street crossing which is scheduled to begin immediately. The breakdown of project-cost responsibility is as follows: City of La Quinta: $17,165, Inco Homes: $87,500, SB 300 funds: $35,000 with design and inspection costs totaling $21,704 to be reimbursed by DSUSD per the Cooperative Agreement. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 15 September 20, 1994 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to approve an appropriation of $118,000 of infrastructure funds for the Adams Street Whitewater River Channel Crossing Project. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94- 196. 5. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL ADVERTISING DEVICE 94-050 FOR APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY SUBDIVISION FLAGS FOR THE TOPAZ PROJECT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, EAST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD. APPLICANT: CENTURY HOMES. Mayor Pena referred to the staff report which advised that Century Homes has requested permission to erect 20 temporary subdivision flags at the location of their model homes along Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road. Council Member Perkins stated that he's beginning to share Council Member McCartney's concerns about the number of flags that are flying in the various developments and suggested reducing the number allowed in each application. Mayor Pena agreed that the number needs to be reduced. Council Member Sniff didn't see that it's a significant problem at this time and felt that it can be looked at some time in the future. He believed that they're attractive and the subdivisions need to advertise. Council Member McCartney stated that he would support any measure that would: 1) reduce the number of flags in the City; 2) issue permits for a shorter time period; and 3) reduce the height of the flags. If this permit is approved, it will result in 107 flags flying over the City. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve Special Advertising Device 94-050, permitting 20 temporary flags for the Topaz project, subject to the findings and conditions of approval. Motion carried with Council Member McCartney voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-197. 6. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL ADVERTISING DEVICE 94-051 FOR APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY SUBDIVISION FLAGS FOR INCO HOMES LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF MILES AVENUE AND ADAMS STREET. Mayor Pena referred to the staff report which advised that Inco Homes has requested a permit to erect 25 temporary rigidly-mounted flags; 14 on Miles Avenue and 11 on both sides of Coldcreek Lane between Miles Avenue and the model complex. Staff has BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 16 September 20, 1994 informed the applicant that the City's ordinance limits the number of flags allowed to 21 and recommended approval of 21 flags for a period of one year, subject to findings and conditions of staff. Council Member Mccartney advised that if these flags are approved there will be 128 flags flying over La Quinta and noted the request for a larger flag and the distances between flags. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve Special Advertising Device 94-051 for a one-year time period, subject to findings and conditions of approval, the total number of flags to 21. Motion carried with Council Member McCartney voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-198. Council Member Perkins requested that the Community Development Department and Planning Commission review the temporary flag regulations, as it pertains to the number of flags, size and height, and make a recommendation to the Council. Council concurred. 7. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIAL ADVERTISING DEVICE 9?O49 FOR APPROVAL OF A PORT-A-PANEL SIGN AND BANNER LOCATION AND SIZE CHANGE FOR THE MAINSTREET MARKETPLACE: APPLICANT: LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, recommended that Condition No. 4 be deleted which requires all small directional signs and banner(s) must be removed within 24 hours after each event, and Condition No.9 to be amended to read the 50?square-foot, temporary directional sign at Washington Street and Highway 111 may be installed one week prior to each event, but must be removed within 48 hours after the Monday following each street fair function?. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve Special Advertising Device 94-049 Amendment 1) permitting additional off-site advertising for the Mainstreet Marketplace Street Fair, subject to the findings and modified conditions of approval. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-199. 8. CONSIDEIL?ION OF AIRTOUCH CELLULAR PROPOSAL FOR LOCATING A CELLULAR MONOPOLE AND EQUIPMENT CONTAINER AT THE LA QUINTA SPORTS COMPLEX. Ms. Francisco, Recreation Supervisor, advised that on July 19, 1994 AirTouch Cellular made a proposal before the Council to locate a monopole and equipment container at the BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 17 September 20, 1994 La Quinta Sports Complex site and Council requested AirTouch to address some issues of concern and report back to Council. The two specific issues not addressed by AirTouch were negotiating of the $500/month-lease payment and the underground placement of the equipment container. Therefore, staff recommended denial of the project. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to deny the request by AirTouch Cellular to locate a monopole and equipment container at the La Quinta Sports Complex, based on the lack of response to the Council's request for negotiations and for underground placement of the equipment Container. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-200. 9. CONSIDERATION OF EXTENDING THE ADJUSTED BUSINESS LICENSE FEE FOR SPECIAL EVENT VENDORS. Mayor Pena referred to the staff report which advised that the business license fees are charged annually based on the calendar year with the current annual fee for a special event/street vendor being $15.00. The Mainstreet Marketplace events stretch over two calendar years and on October 5, 1993, Council approved a partial waiver of fees for the vendors making the fee for all six events between October 1993 and December 1994 a total of $18.75. Staff recornmended that new vendors for the upcoming event be granted the same fee waiver and noted that business license fees are being reviewed under the comprehensive fee study. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the extension of adjusting business license fees for special event vendors. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-201. 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REPLACEMENT OF IV VESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER AND AUTHORIZATION TO COMMENCE SELECTION PROCESS. Mayor Pena advised that this item would be continued until after the public hearings. See Page No.31) 11. CONSIDERATION OF SELECTION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE FOR ANNUAL LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE IN LONG BEACH OCTOBER 23-25, 1994. Mayor Pena advised that he plans to attend the conference and Council Member McCartney advised that he may attend. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 18 September 20, 1994 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins that Mayor Pena be designated as the voting delegate with Council Member McCartney as the alternate. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-202. 12. TRANSMITTAL OF CITY OF LA QUINTA AND LA QUINTA FINANCING AUTHORITY TREASURER'S REPORTS DATED JULY 31, 1994. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to receive and file the Treasurer's Report dated July 31, 1994 for the City of La Quinta. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9?203. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to receive and file the Treasurer's Report dated July 31, 1994 for the La Quinta Financing Authority Agency. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-204. 13. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES ORDINANCE NO.253 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 6.04.050(C) RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Ordinance No.253 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, McCartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE NO.254 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 3.24.020(A) OF THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Ordinance No.254 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, McCartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 19 September 20, 1994 14. CONSIDERATION OF LETTER FROM LIA GILBERT RESIGNING FROM THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE AND SELECTION OF NEW COMMITTEE MEMBER. Mayor Pena advised that this item would be continued until after public hearings and Business Item No.10. See Page No.32) 15. APPROVAL OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF A BANKING AND CUSTODIAL SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENT. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the issue was routine in nature, but requested that the Council appoint a selection committee if deemed appropriate. Council Members Bangerter and Sniff volunteered to serve on the selection committee. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to approve the distribution of a banking and custodial safekeeping) services Request For Proposal RFP) document, naming Council Member Bangerter and Council Member Sniff as members on the selection committee process. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9? 205. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTERS DATED AUGUST 16, SEPTEMBER 6, AND SEPTEMBER 20, 1994. 2. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE ON AGING FOR FUNDING. 3. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED BY TONY AND STELLA CABANYOG, DATE OF LOSS APRIL 1, 1994. 4. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES BY GTE CALIFORNIA, DATh OF LOSS FFBRUARY 24, 1994. 5. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE BUILDING AND SAFETY BUILDING INSPECTOR/CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TO ATTEND THE CSTI EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COURSE: DISASTER EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY, OCTOBER 3-7, 1994. 6. APPROVAL OF THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ADDING A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 20 September 20, 1994 7. APPROVAL OF EXTENSION OF LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS WITH MENTONE TURF TO JUNE 30, 1995. 8. APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT WITH DAVID M. GRIFFITH AND ASSOCIATES FOR STATE-MANDATES REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST SUBMITTAL SERVICES IN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $4,000. 9. ACCEPTANCE OF WHITEWATERIWASHINGTON STREET BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO.92-3. 10. APPROVAL OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF A BANKING AND CUSTODIAL SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENT. Sec Business Session No.15) 11. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE COACHELLA VALLEY MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY'S DESERT MOUNTAINS LICENSE PLATE CAMPAIGN. RES) Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, stated that he disagreed with the extension of the Landscape Maintenance Agreement with Mentone Turf due to the service currently being provided. He noted that he and others had voiced their dissatisfaction before. He believed that extending the contract without opening it for competition is not showing much responsiveness of Council to the citizens of La Quinta. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the extension is for the purpose of being consistent with the bidding process and not intended to give a blanket contract to Mentone Turf. Mr. Cosper, Director of Public Works, reiterated the City Manager's comments noting the City is attempting to have all contract expiration dates correspond with the beginning and ending dates of the Landscape and Lighting Assessment Districts, making it easier to estimate the costs for the following fiscal year. Mayor Pena shared Mr. Tyler's concerns advising that there is dying landscaping not only in the medians, but in various developments. In a related action, he felt that we need to look at the dying orchards as they are not only a visual nuisance, but a Fife hazard as well. He asked that a report be brought back to the Council at the next meeting. Council Member Sniff concurred. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt the Consent Calendar as amended with Item No.11 being approved by RESOLUTION NO.94-57. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 21 September 20, 1994 Council Member Perkins requested, in relationship to Item No.9, that the Public Works Director examine the northbound lanes approach to the Washington Street bridge for deterioration as the road is rough and bumpy. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-206. Mayor Pena advised that the Study Session and Mayor and Council Member's Items would be heard after the public hearings. See Page No.33) Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened in a joint session with the Redevelopment Agency. JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Public Hearing Items Nos. 1 and 2 were continued until after the joint public hearings. See Page No.23) 3. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND BUILDING HORIZONS. Council Member Bangerter abstained from this issue due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Spevacek, Rosenow, Spevacek Group, Inc., financial consultant to the City, advised that, on August 16, 1994, staff had been directed to negotiate with representatives of the Building Horizons Group, an affiliate of the Boys and Girls Club of Coachella Valley, who had requested assistance from the City to facilitate the construction of single-family homes in the Cove. The proposed resolution would approve the Disposition and Development Agreement which generally puts their proposal in place. The agreement requires the following from the Agency: 1) to acquire two lots in the Cove, one of which is owned by the Agency and the other is in acquisition negotiations, with an estimated value of $40,000; 2) to provide up to $85,000 in construction-financing assistance to facilitate the construction of these two single-family homes. The two homes will be approximately 1400 square feet and designed in conformance with all City development standards and upon completion will be sold on the open market to moderate-income household families for approximately $105,000 each. The funds will be repayed to the Agency when the homes are sold, at which time, the Agency will provide second-trust deeds for a term of approximately 33 years to insure that the two homes are sold at a cost affordable to moderate-income household families. The Building Horizons program is designed to teach junior and senior high school students the construction trade. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 22 September 20, 1994 Mr. Scott Jones, Program Director for Building Horizons, Inc., said 39 students are currently enrolled in the program with three more applications received recently and both school districts have approved the curriculum. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Jones advised that they are ready to begin construction immediately and the program will last for the nine-month school year, expecting completion of the homes in mid-May. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.94-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND BUILDING HORIZONS, INC. AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. It was moved by Council Members SnifflMcCartney to adopt Resolution No.94-58 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member Bangerter abstaining. 4. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. Council Member Bangerter returned to the dais. Mr. Spevacek, Rosenow, Spevacek Group, Inc., financial consultant to the City, advised that, on July 5, 1994, the Agency and City Council approved a Disposition and Development Agreement DDA) with Williams Development Corporation, which facilitated the construction of 62 single-family homes, 91 senior citizen multi-family apartments, a five-acre park retention basin, and related infrastructure improvements. on 23.23 acres located north of Calle Tampico and east of Desert Club Drive. Part of the funding structure involved the developer seeking tax credits financing from the California Tax Allocation Board which will provide up to 40% of the funding necessary to construct the senior citizen housing component. In order to receive the allocation, certain modifications to the DDA are required. The first modification is a reduction of single- family units from 62 to 60, because the engineered site plan shows that only 60 unitS will fit on the site. This modification will result in a concurrent reduction in the number of moderate-income units in the project from 42 to 40. It may also result in a reduction of needed funding from the Agency of $16,000. The second modification is a BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 23 September 20, 1994 reclassification of one of the 91 multi-family units to a caretaker unit versus a rental unit. Modifications were made to definitions to allow for a road easement to be transferred to the developer, to be dedicated back to the City upon completion of road improvements, as well as other definitions which fit the tax-credit financing. The most substantial modification is requiring the developer to obtain letters of intent versus the binding construction-financing commitments previously required in the DDA. The developer is unable to obtain binding commitments unless he has possession of the property. The City will continue to be protected under the DDA by the Deed of Trust and Promissory Note that will be executed, which provides the Agency with a means to gain control of the property should the developer fail to follow through with his commitments. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Spevacek clarified that the proposed modifications does not change the manner in which the Agency would recover the property if necessary. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that the purpose in transferring the property ownership earlier in the process is because the Tax Credit Allocation Board requires the developer to own the property at a point during their evaluation which is earlier than when a lender usually will give a final commitment on a loan. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.94-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE FIRST RESTATED AND AMENDED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND E. G. WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No.94-59 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. At this time the meeting of the Redevelopment Agency was adjourned. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. PLOT PLAN 93-495 EXTENSION NO.1 APPEAL BY SIMON PLAZA REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED PROJECT ON 5.6i ACRES ON HIGHWAY 111, EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 24 September 20,1994 Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that the applicant has requested a continuance to October 18, 1994. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to continue this item until October 18, 1994. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-207. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-012 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-013; CONSIDERATION OF CUP'S TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN RV/TRAVEL-TRAILER RESORT AND A GOLF-DRIVING RANGE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND MILES AVENUE. APPLICANT: THOMAS BIENEK. Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that Council continued this item on July 19, 1994 to allow additional considerations and study of the project. The main issues of concern raised at the previous Council meeting were traffic circulation, lighting, noise, visibility of the poles and netting, and compatibility. The applicant's response to these concerns is contained in the staff report as well as concerns raised at a community meeting held with property owners in the area. The prior Environmental Assessment prepared for the A.G. Spanos project, which consisted of a seven-acre commercial site for 736 apartments and 300 single-family units, was used in conjunction with the Environmental Assessment prepared for this project. Staff determined from these two assessments that a Negative Declaration was adequate and the project was conditioned to mitigate the environmental impacts that could be determined. The options before the Council at this time are: 1) to require a full or focused Environmental Impact Report for the two projects prior to consideration of the two conditional use permits; 2) adopt the Negative Declaration and approve one or both of the CUP's; or 3) deny one or both of the applications. Staff and Planning Commission recommended approval of both CUP's, subject to conditions contained in the staff report. Council Member Sniff asked for the status of the previous project planned for this site. Mr. Herman advised that there is an approved Specific Plan consisting of 736 apartment unitS and 300 single-family units. The commercial site was eliminated in the General Plan Update and designated as a cornmunity park; however, that park is now being relocated into the 300 single-family residential area as there is a community park across Miles Avenue. While there is no sponsor for the project, the Specific Plan permit is still viable, as it runs with the land not with a developer. This project, if approved, will replace the previously-approved project. In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Herman advised that the zoning of R-3 with a general plan designation of high-density residential, would remain constant unless a request to change the zoning was proposed by a developer. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 25 September 20,1994 Mr. Thomas Bienek, P.O. Box 449, La Quinta, applicant for The Painngs" R.V. Resort and Golf-Driving Range; stated he is a resident of La Quinta and has been in the golfing profession for more than 25 years. During his 21 years as a resident of Coachella Valley, he has worked at four different country clubs. Because of his golf experience, he decided to construct a golf-driving range and began searching for property and found most parcels to be either too small or too large. Upon locating the property at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington Street he decided to construct an R.V. Resort along with the golf-driving range because of the extra acreage involved. The project is intended to promote both junior and senior golf. He referred to a letter mailed to the Council on September 9th in which he responded to the Council's concerns. Included in the letter is an estimate of the projected City revenues from the project. He also referred to a letter from his planner, Joe Richards, which also addressed the City's concerns, especially the areas related to lighting. He noted that the originally-planned pole lighting for the golf-driving range has been changed to ground lighting with pole lights behind the tee area. He introduced his lighting consultant, Mr. Larry Bojkovsky of Cove Electric. Mr. Larry Bojkovsky, lighting consultant for Cove Electric, 74-894 Lennon Place, Palm Desert; advised that he has reviewed the applicant's lighting plan and determined that it is adequate according to Illuminating Engineers Standards IES). At Mr. Bienek's request, he compared the amount of proposed lighting at The Pairings" project with the outside lighting of an apartment complex. He used a current 144-unit apartment complex in Indio as a guideline and determined that the total outside lighting wattage for the apartment project was 36,800 watts or 255 watts per apartment. Upon multiplying the 255 watts per apartment times the 736 previously-approved apartments the total amount of estimated wattage for outside lighting of the apartment complex is 188,344 watts, nine times the amount of lighting emitted by the golf-driving range. The lighting plan for The Painngs" golf-driving range calls for 20,800 watts of lighting, not including ground lighting or the lighting for the R.V. Park. He noted that outside apartment lighting would remain on all night, but the golf-driving range lights would be off at 10:00 p.m. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. Mr. Mark Sarto, 78-820 Sanita Drive, was in opposition to the proposed project, noting the multi-level golf tees are inconsistent with other driving ranges in the valley. Mr. Anthony Scarpinato, 78-685 Bradford Circle, was in opposition to the proposed project and would also be in opposition to any proposed apartment complex on the same site, noting the previous approval for the apartment complex was before the development that now surrounds the site and believed it would not be allowed at the present time. He lives within 350 feet of the project, but again, did not receive notice of the public hearing. He disagreed with the Planning Department's justification for determining that an EIR was not needed for this project noting additional impacts of the netting, noise, BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 26 September 20, 1994 lighting, traffic, etc. Additionally, he believed Council Member Bangerter should abstain from voting on this issue because of campaign contributions she received from Stamko Development of Santa Monica, the owners of the subject property. In response to Mr. Scarpinato, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that contributions to political campaigns are not part of the Political Reform Act that is reviewed for purposes of conflict of interest. To do so would be an abridgement of first amendment rights. Mr. Andrew Devin, 78-815 W. Harland, believed the applicant was negligent in addressing any of the concerns of the Council or citizens because he failed to submit any revised plans for the project since those submitted in July. He believed the project is inconsistent with the nature of the community, noting the site was chosen because of size only and the lighting and noise information supplied is inadequate. Mr. Robert Metkus, La Quinta Palms and La Quinta Highlands, was in opposition to the project believing the netting to be unsightly. He preferred to have a residential area at the proposed location. Mr. Dale Jessey, 78-830 Sanita Drive, presented a home-made video of a golf-driving range in Moreno Valley that has approximately 50 feet of black netting and poles which he felt was unsightly. The Moreno Valley project is not built in a residential area yet it affects nearby residential areas at nighttime because of the lights on the driving range and has caused one resident, who lives approximately mile from the range, to have to install black-out curtains in her home. The video demonstrated the glowing effect from a distance of approximately three miles away from the driving range. Mr. Roger Isabell, 44-030 Camino La Cresta, was in opposition to the project due to the environmental impact the light will have on the dark skies". He said the Palomar Observatory has responded to the project noting that La Quinta is within Zone B of Riverside County Ordinance 655, which embraces La Quinta's own lighting ordinance restrictions in Chapter 9.210 and Palomar has requested that the project be required to follow those standards. He believed that the proposed lighting for the project does not meet the shielding requirements in the ordinance. In reference to the night lighting at the La Quinta High School he said they are only on during athletic events, as opposed to seven nights a week for the driving range. They also meet the compliance regulations and qualify for the exemption as a recreational facility. If the project is allowed it will open the door for similar projects in the future and he believed the City should require an EIR for the project. Mr. Max FIor, 44-790 Seeley Drive, was in opposition to the project noting the glare of the lighting from, not only the driving range, but also the parking lot, swimming pool area, volleyball courts, pathways, etc. He believed insufficient information has been submitted by the applicant regarding the lighting and the Council should not approve the BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 27 September 20, 1994 project. He opposed the netting and poles and use of a previous FIR. He believed Inco Homes supports the project because of a reimbursement agreement signed by Inco Homes, Starriko Development.and Bienek on August 10, 1994 which includes an option to purchase dated February 1994. Mr. James DeAguilera, 1855 Rossmont Drive, Redlands, an attorney representing concerned citizens of North La Quinta as well as Lisa and Andrew Devin; advised that his clients are opposed to the project and they believe it requires an FIR. He is a former planning director for the City of Loma Linda and former environmental review board officer for San Bernardino County. The purpose of an FIR is to provide full disclosure. Under CEQA, an independent analysis of the impacts by the developer does not qualify as environmental impact analysis. The FIR should be prepared by a third party under contract to the City or by the developer and reviewed by the City. He believed that the previously-prepared FIR's for the previous project and General Plan Update are not usable on this project. The law will not allow comparison impacts of the two projects to reach a conclusion that the impacts of the proposed project are greater than the impacts of the previous bad project. He advised that the standard of review for requiring an FIR is whether any fair argument can be made that the impacts of the current project may have significant impacts on the environment. He believed that numerous fair arguments have been made about the unmitigated impacts of this project. He believed the initial study prepared by staff to be extremely cursory and conclusionary and not able to support the finding of a Negative Declaration. He referred Council to his letter, previously submitted, regarding his comments on each of the impacts in the study. He offered to work together with the developer and staff to scope the EIR and identify the impacts that need to be evaluated so that a proper FIR can be prepared. Mr. Robert Ritchey, 78-340 Sevilla, stated he is an architect and believed that the proposed clubhouse is incompatible with the community's architecture in height and design. He also opposed the project because he didn't believe that the R-3 zoning regulations allowed the golf-driving range; the parking at the clubhouse is insufficient; and shared the same concerns as others regarding the lighting. He noted that the driving range slopes slightly toward the storm channel and he was concerned that the lighting from there and the clubhouse could be seen from the Albertson's shopping center. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, supported the project and believed the reasons given for opposing it are inadequate and exaggerated. He believed that the project would be a nice addition to La Quinta and felt comfortable that the City's ordinance regarding R.V. Parks would insure proper maintenance and security. He preferred the proposed project to a low-income development, multi-family apartment complex, more single- family homes or commercial use, noting the R.V. Park would not impact the school system. He urged the Council to consider the merits of the project and what it will bring to the City. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 28 September 20, 1994 Mr. Christopher BIaisdell, 44-159 Chamonix, Palm Desert, supported the project advising the Council of his background in R.V. Park development and management and believed the opposition's concerns are due to fear of the unknown. The Washington Street and Miles Avenue intersection is a major arterial intersection and should be expected to have some type of development other than single-family homes. He believed an R.V. Park would be a good transition buffer in the area and a better neighbor than strip commercial or apartments because R.V. Park residents are quiet, law-abiding senior citizens. The night lighting will be turned off at 10:00 p.m., unlike the lighting at Wal- Mart and Albertson's shopping centers. He noted that some of the concerns voiced at the meeting held by Mr. Bienek such as, the consumption of alcohol at the restaurant, were not unique to this project, noting that all laws regarding sale of liquor would apply to this project just as anywhere else. He believed the desire of the developer to maintain the R.V. Park as a five-star park insures proper landscape maintenance and any noise pollution has been mitigated by the City's restrictions on the development. Mr. Robert Ferraud, 40-700 Starlight Lane, Bermuda Dunes, supported the project believing it to be more preferable than an apartment complex and an asset to the community. Mr. Russell Robertson, 44-930 Tortola Circle, was in support of the project noting there would be greater impact to the community if the approved number of apartments were constructed on the land. He related the following positive aspects of the project: the City will receive revenue from the project with little or no use of City services; the seasonal traffic will be less than that generated by an apartment complex, noting on-street parking of RV's is not allowed; the R.V. Park would not impact the schools; a nine-hole executive golf course planned for the wash area, along with heavily-landscaped setbacks and waterfalls, which will improve the visual impacts now present. He believed concerns regarding drugs, crime, graffiti and gangs are unfounded because R.V. residents are usually golf-playing, money-spending retirees that usually drive RV's more expensive than many homes. He noted that golfers, RV'ers, snow-birding senior citizens are important part of the market segment of the valley and believed the project would make them feel welcome, as well as provide a recreational site for La Quinta residents. Mr. Rex Sylvester, 78-900 Anthony Road, Bermuda Dunes, supported the project because it provides a recreational area for junior and senior golf. He believed the project is a great addition to the area with its *?state of the art' driving range and facilities. He said that the developer has plans to mitigate the lighting impact as well as the visibility of the netting and asked Council to approve the project. Mr. John Vogley, 75-621 Painted Desert, Indian Wells, the landscape architect for the project; stated he is a Planning Commissioner for the City of Indian Wells and advised of the various country club projects he has been involved with: Vintage, Morningside, Thunderbird and Eldorado. He expressed confidence in the developer and the project, believing it to be much-needed in the valley. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 29 September 20, 1994 Ms. Chris Clarke, representative for the project's property owner, Stamko Development Co., 10100 Santa Monica Blvd. Ste. 400, Los Angeles; clarified that her campaign contribution to Council Member Bangerter was solely to promote her as a woman" in the political arena. She also clarified that the reimbursement agreement between Inco Homes, Bienek and Starnko was for the purpose of sharing the burden of off-site improvements to the property. She advised that she was in negotiations with a developer to construct apartments on the property at the time Mr. Bienek approached her regarding this project, and because she liked his project better and Inco Homes did not want apartments built there, she decided to negotiate with him. She advised that she has both a vested tentative map on this land and developers who want to build apartments there. She referred to a rumor that the City plans to condemn her land and obtain it by eminent domain to build a 54-acre park and advised Council that if that is their intent they should inform her and begin negotiations to purchase the land, noting she would sell it at fair market price. Mr. Fred Farr, representative for Inco Homes, 250 E. Rincon Avenue Suite 202, Corona, stated that Inco Homes owns a 150-lot subdivision immediately east of the proposed R.V. Park and they have an option to purchase on another adjacent 150 lots that doesn't have to be exercised for 12-18 months. The project is underway with the first model expected to open in November 1994. He advised that the reimbursement agreement referred to earlier between Inco Homes, Bienek and Stamko represents a reimbursement for extensive utility costs. That reimbursement represents about one percent of the investment made on the 150 homes built. He noted that similar agreements have been signed with CVWD that are substantially larger. He advised that Inco Homes supports the project and believes the developer has mitigated any previous concerns. He believed the City's ordinance has sufficient enforcement provisions to insure that the proposed development is developed and maintained in a quality manner. He disagreed with any comparison of an R.V. Park with a trailer park. Mr. Joe Richards, Richards, Mueting, and Wilkes, 629 Riverside Avenue, Riverside, advised that the environmental issues have been addressed through an initial study prepared by staff, based on information submitted by the applicant as well as information received from the previously-approved, 737-apartment project and commercial plan. Information from the General Plan EIR in conjunction with the apartment project EIR went into the preparation of the initial study. A Negative Declaration was issued by staff, based on the initial study, and was endorsed by the Planning Commission. All the issues raised at the July 19th Council meeting were issues already addressed in the initial study, but the developer has responded by letter, to those issues for the purpose of elaborating on those concerns. He advised that they were not deferring mitigation, but rather incorporating mitigation into the project through design or conditions of approval. The project plans have not been revised since the July meeting, but many revisions were made prior to July after receiving input from residents, staff, Planning Commission and Council. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 30 September 20, 1994 Mr. Scott Zundel, 36-736 Nancy Lane, referred to the opposition's opinion that a new EIR is required for this project and stated he disagreed and believed that Council should rely on the Negative Declaration unless any new facts are presented at this meeting that would support the need for a new EIR. Lighting is the only issue addressed by facts and the applicant is willing to comply with any condition that might be imposed on the project to be in compliance with the City's lighting ordinance. Therefore, no evidence has been provided that would support the necessary legal findings that would require an EIR. He read excerpts from the Public Resources Code Section 21100 regarding CEQA's requirements for an EIR and concluded that no significant evidence has been presented that would require an EIR. He noted that Council adopted a Negative Declaration in September 1989 for a more intense project on this same parcel than the current proposed project. In conjunction with that action, staff's recommendations and Planning Commission findings, he believed that Council has ample legal ability to adopt a Negative Declaration. Under Section 15063 of the California Code of Regulations the Council may rely on the previous EIR to determine a Negative Declaration. He expressed corifidence in Mr. Bienek as a developer and believed the City would be satisfied with the project. Ms. Faye Scarpinato, 78-685 Bradford Circle, was in opposition to the project stating that her property is less than 350 feet from the proposed development. She stated that all but one of those speaking in support of the project at this Council meeting either live in other cities or have a personal interest in the project. She believed the project itself is nice, but inappropriate at the present site. Council recessed into Closed Session pursuant to Government Code 54956.9(a) potential threat of litigation for conference with legal counsel. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, announced that the Council did conclude a Closed Session under Government Code 54956.9, threat of potential litigation, and was solely for the purpose of discussing the threat with legal counsel and no decision was made that needs to be reported There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Mayor Pena expressed appreciation for the professionalism and cooperation demonstrated by both opponents and proponents of the project. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Mccartney/Sniff that based on the evidence presented to Council; the Council does not believe that the proposed Negative Declaration has adequately addressed the potential significant environmental impacts of this project. The Council finds that, based on the evidence presented, there may be significant impacts which require an Environmental Impact Report EIR) in order to fully review and make a determination on this project. Therefore, the Council has no alternative but to deny the conditional use permits for the driving range and the recreational vehicle use because the City Council is unable to make a finding that the environmental review is adequate under State CEQA requirements. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 & City Council Minutes 31 September 20, 1994 Council Member Perkins asked the City Attorney if it would be proper for the Council to continue the hearing to give the applicant an opportunity to prepare an EIR as opposed to denying the project. Ms. Honeywell advised that, technically, it would not make a difference in the City's requirements of the applicant. If the applicant wishes to continue the project and Council determines that an EIR must be prepared to allow adequate review of the project then the applicant will have to go through all the steps of the EIR process, regardless of whether the applications are continued or denied. If the Council should deny the project as the motion was made, it would not be for lack of merit itself; but lack of adequate environmental information to be able to make a decision. The options available are to deny the project based upon the fact that Council cannot make the environmental finding or continue it to a date certain. If Council should continue the application, she recommended a minimum of six months to allow sufficient time for the applicant to prepare the EIR. If the application is continued, it would be up to the applicant to make any changes in the presentation of the project and staff would process the EIR through the Planning Commission and Council again. If the application is denied, the applicant will have to submit a new application. Council Member Sniff believed that a comprehensive and complete EIR is essential to properly and fairly evaluate the project as he believed that Council has received insufficient information and conflicting testimony. Council Member Bangerter preferred to require an EIR and continue the project as opposed to denying it. Therefore, she will vote against the motion. Motion carried with Council Member Bangerter voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO. 208. Council Member Perkins expressed appreciation for the courtesy and concern extended by all in attendance and believed the input by residents is always important. BUSINESS SESSION............Continued 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REPLACEMENT OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER AND AUTHORIZATION TO COMMENCE SELECTION PROCESS. Staff report indicated that Board Member Wilson has had excessive absenteeism and recommended that he be replaced. Staff submitted applications of Bruce Anderson, Sheryl Yardumian and Joseph Irwin for consideration. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &City Council Minutes 32 September 20, 1994 MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter that Joseph Irwin be appointed to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Wilson to the Investment Advisory Board. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-209. 14. ACCEPTANCE OF RESIGNATION OF LIA GILBERT AND APPOINTMENT TO THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE. Council accepted the resignation of Lia Gilbert and considered the applications of Rosita Shamis, Sharyl Yardumian and Gail Young. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins that Gail Young be appointed to the unexpired term of Lia Gilbert on the Art in Public Places Committee. Motion failed to carry with Council Members Bangerter, McCartney and Mayor Pena voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-210. MOTION It was moved by Council Members McCartney/Bangerter that Rosita Shamis be appointed to the unexpired term of Lia Gilbert on the Art in Public Places Cornmittee. Motion carried with Council Member Sniff voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-211. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Mayor Pena advised that the Airlines Task Force is looking for an appointment from the City Council as well as a citizen member and Brad Quayle from KSL is interested in such an appointment. He has experience from assisting with the airport in Vail, Colorado. MOTION It was moved by Mayor Pena and seconded by Council Member Sniff that Brad Quayle be appointed as the member representative from the City of La Quinta to the Airlines Task Force. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 9?212. Mayor Pena referred to the Thermal Airport JPA in which we had requested that the County hold us harmless and questioned the status. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that we had asked to be added as an additionally-insured and they came back with the fact that they are self-insured"; so we asked that they give us a certificate indicating that they consider our function to be covered under their self-insurance and, thus far, nothing has been received. Mr. Parzonko, Finance Director, advised that this issue was discussed at the meeting held on September 19th and the County was adding the member agencies as additional-insured. We BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 !& City Council Minutes 33 September 20, 1994 should be receiving a certificate in the near fliture and then we can select a representative to the Board. DEPARTMENT REPORTS Regarding the Senior Center Ribbon Cutting/Grand Opening, Council concurred with Option No. 2, which was to combine this ceremony with the Holiday Open House on or about December 15th. Mr. Herman, Planning Commission Director, advised that staff is planning a joint meeting between the City Council and Planning to review the draft housing element of the General Plan and suggested such a meeting on either October 3rd or October 5th. Council concurred on October 3rd at 7:00 p.rri. Council Member McCartney was pleased that the Engineering staff is using the new computer software program effectively and asked if the software is. sufficient for the tasks ahead of the Department. Mr. Cosper advised that we have purchased $4,000 worth of AUTO CAD materials which will very effectively cut down on staff time. Mayor Pena wished to see more training on software programs and suggested purchase of tutorials. Council Member Perkins suggested that the City look at creating some parking next to the hardware store on Calle Tampico on the vacant land between the curb and the store. Mr. Cosper advised that staff is looking at providing additional parking in that area as part of the Capital Improvement Program. He suggested that we wait and do it properly rather than doing something temporary as an interim measure. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS 1. PROPOSAL FROM KIPNES & ASSOCIATES. Mayor Pena advised that he and the City Manager met with Mr. Kipnes regarding a proposal of becoming a lobbyist on behalf of the City due to his contacts. He was wondering if we might be interested in hiring a consultant to do government-relations BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 "&City Council Minutes 34 September 20, 1994 work. Mr. Kipnes believes that there's a lot of money available that he might be able to obtain for the City. Council concurred that this is something we need to be looking at, whether or not Kipnes is the one, but suggested that the City Manager meet with Kipnes in an effort to move forward in this direction. Mr. Genovese advised that this could be something in which we will have to comply with the consultant-selection process and Mayor Pena suggested that the whole consultant- selection process be reviewed. 2. UPDATE ON COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT. Council Member McCartney advised that on February 1, 1994, the Council considered the County's proposal for a County Sanitation District and after reviewing further information provided by staff, the Council decided not to join the district at that time. The County has formed a sanitation district for the unincorporated. areas, but without any membership from valley cities. There has been a degree of controversy regarding estimated costs for locating a Materials Recovery Facility MRF), in the valley. EcoNomics Inc., the consultant working on the RFP for CVAG, has estimated the cost at $20 million. Upon visiting many MRF's in California, Oregon and Washington, he believes the consultant's estimated costs for a 1,000 to 1,700-tons-per-day MRF is excessive and the consultant's approach is weak. He advised that he has helped design a 5,000-tons-a-day MRF in the City of Industry and toured a fully automated, state-of- the-art, 3,000-tons-per-day MRF in Portland, Oregon that cost only $10 million. He stated $20 million *?could" be spent on a MRF, but believed $10 million was a more reasonable amount. In response to Council Member Sniff, Council Member McCartney said he received the $20 million cost figure from members of the County Task Force. Council Member Sniff believed that figure to be erroneous. He stated that he and Mayor Pena are both members of the MRF Task Force and noted that the Task Force is currently reviewing land sites and requirements to that land. During MRF Task Force discussions, the estimated cost of a MRF has been less than $5 million. Council Member McCartney stated he has heard $3.5 to $7 million. Council Member Sniff clarified with Council Member McCartney that the $20 million cost figure mentioned previously by him included, not only the MRF, but also purchase of land and land development, transfer station, etc. He advised that a MRF is only one component of the entire MRF process. He confirmed that the $20 million amount includes the entire project. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 #&City Council Minutes 35 September 20, 1994 Mr. Baker, Principal Planner, advised that the figures that have been received range from $13.5 to $20 million and include the entire processing, permitting and project development, architectural engineering fees, construction costs, land costs, rolling stock for the MRF, including all the transfer trucks and bulldozers, transfer station and the MRF. The amount is a budget figure for the Task Force to work with. Competitive bids will be received on the project and each aspect of the MRF will be broken down in detail. Council Member McCartney reiterated his opinion that $20 million was excessive and believed that anything over $10 million is out of line, but $13.5 million is in closer range. Mr. Baker advised that the consultant's estimate for construction of a transfer station that could become a MRF is $5.5 to $7 million and MRF processing equipment is $3.5 to $7 million, depending on the type of MRF equipment installed. Council Member McCartney advised that the cost of the Portland MRF included the land and all necessary inside equipment. Mr. Baker advised that the consultant's figures came from actual costs of MRF' 5 recently constructed within other California communities such as Sunnyvale and Stanton. Council Member Sniff advised that issues under discussion by the Task Force are whether or not to have two transfer stations and the most cost-effective location. He noted that the Task Force has proceeded very cauflously so far and is yet to determine whether or not to go ahead with the project. There are many variables yet to be determined such as access to and the certainty of the wastestream. The Coachella landfill has less than a year before reaching capacity. Mayor Pena believed that a MRF may not be completed by the time Edom Hill's lifespan has ended. Mr. Baker advised that Edom Hill's lifespan has been estimated at 3-S years. Council Member Sniff advised there has been discussions about possibly transporting the waste westwardly as opposed to Edom Hill. Council Member McCartney advised that Arizona's la Paz County Supervisors are advertising transportation and disposal costs of $25 a ton. Current landfill rates locally are $35.50 a ton. BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 $&City Council Minutes 36 September 20, 1994 STUDY SESSION 1. DISCUSSION OF AQUATIC PROGRAMMING SERVICES FOR FRITZ BURNS PARK. Mayor Pena abstained from this issue due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Bohien, Parks & Recreation Director, presented a report regarding aquatic programming for the Fritz Burns Park; asking that the Council provide staff with some direction regarding program emphasis, which has an impact on not only Cost recovery, but, also certain design features. Direction is also being requested as to whether or not the Council prefers to see the operation of the facility contracted out or operated by City staff. The options available for programming emphasis are: 1) recreation programming or 2) instructional or a mix of the two. Staff reviewed the operations of several pools, both City-operated and contracted. The review consisted of documenting total expenditures, revenues, operating hours, program emphasis and operating systems. Both the cities of La Mesa and Carlsbad are achieving a substantial cost recovery for pool operations and both are operated in-house. Both cities recovered 52% of total costs. There are several reasons why their cost recovery percentage is notable the largest contributing factor is the low percentage of program emphasis and budget dollars on what is commonly known as recreation swim" programs. The percentage of cost recovery decreases as the percentage of the program budget expended on recreation swim increases. The reason is that recreation swim programs are heavily subsidized. Traditionally, learn-to-swim instructional programs, water recreation leagues and special interest classes and program meet or can exceed expenditures. Mr. Bohlen advised that in this year, the City has appropriated $128,015 for pool operations presuming that the Council wishes to go forward with in-house operations and maintenance. Projected revenue is $30,000. However, as we look at anticipated annual expenditures, the cost is $260,586 for year-round operations with anticipated revenue of $86,843. The net effect on the General Fund would be $43,400 if projected revenues are realized; with $130,000 being funded from the Lighting & Landscape District. He noted that in order to have the Lighting & Landscape District assume half of the cost of operating on an annual basis, it was clarified by the Public Works Director that the District's budget would not be growing; so staff anticipated that because park development is no longer under Parks & Recreation, but under Public Works, that the Parks & Recreation Director salary which was half-funded by Lighting and Landscaping District and the Park & Rec Secretary salary which is one-quarter funded by Lighting & BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 %& City Council Minutes 37 September 20, 1994 Landscaping would be shifted from salaries into the pool-operating budget. Therefore, a net. effect is on the General Fund budget of $95,000-s 135,000. Relative to who operates the pool, staff has found that regardless of who operates it; cities usually pay the majority, if not all of the operating costs and the contractor usually absorbs the full cost of the programrning. Council Member McCartney felt that it would be beneficial to test the waters with a survey, as he wasn't comfortable with information that's two years old. Council Member Sniff felt that there is a significant need for this facility as this community is growing rapidly and has a great number of children. He suggested that the pool be built promptly, that the City operate it and that attempt to recoup as much of the expense as possible without restricting the use of the pool. He believed that the high school pool is a fine facility, but is only a supplement to this one. Council Member Bangerter concurred with Council Member Sniff's comments. Council Member Perkins believed that the estimated revenue is high. This facility is going to cost at least $260,000 annually with $130,000 from General Fund and $130,000 from the Lighting and Landscape District, which he had a problem with because there are areas in the City in which landscaping needs to be upgraded. With this money, all of the requested grant applications considered earlier in the meeting could have been funded with money left over. There is no doubt that this City supports its youth, but when this pool was planned, we had no idea that there would be a high school with a pool. That pool could be made available late afternoons, evenings, weekends and during vacation time. He believed that this is a total waste of money and didn't feel that we can afford it. Things change and we have to change with the times the City just doesn't have the money to operate a pool and we'll go broke trying to do it. Regarding use of the high school pool, people in the Cove drive elsewhere; so they could drive to the pool, noting that people in the north end of the City will be having to drive to this pool. We could assist in the maintenance cost of their pool, thereby, saving both the District and the City money. Council Member Sniff responded that there's a great many people who don't have a pool or access to a pool. The people have been promised this facility for some time and was in 100% support of it. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Cosper advised that the estimated cost of the project is $2.1 million. There was a significant savings when we switched from BSI to T.I. Maloney they're estimated cost was $3 million. Council Member Bangerter was supportive of the project. The hours of operation need to be looked at and how we can recoup some of the expenses. She believed that the high BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02 &&City Council Minutes 38 September 20, 1994 school would be too limited to the public and agreed that we have been promising this facility for some time and she frequently gets asked the question as when it will be built. Council Member McCartney clarified that his comments about a survey were meant to find out what we can do to meet the demands of the residents, what they're willing to pay for and what their uses will be. He was completely supportive in moving forward with the facility agreeing that it is expensive to run, SO we need to look at trying to recover as much of the expense as possible. He expressed concern that very few pools are set up for toddlers. In response to Mr. Bohlen, Council Member Sniff clarified that the concurrence of the Council seems to emphasize cost recovery without needlessly restricting the use of the pool airning at cost recovery of at least 507o Council Member Perkins felt that the percentage of cost recovery is an unknown factor and wouldn't want to burden the Parks & Recreation Department with such direction. He urged the Council to utilize the pool at the high school for one year on a contract basis before we go to the tremendous expense of building and maintaining a pool. Mr. Bohlen then clarified for the record, that the emphasis will be on cost recovery and that the pool be operated in-house. Council concurred. CLOSED SESSION Council adjourned to Closed Session to discuss the matters as delineated on Page 13. Council reconvened with no action being taken. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA OLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California BIB] 01-18-96-U01 03:54:48PM-U01 CCMIN092094-U02