1994 07 19 CC Minutes8 LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
July 19, 1994
Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on July 19, 1994 was called to order at the hour
of 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Pena.
PRESENT: Council Members Bangerter, McCartney, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena
ABSENT: None
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Confirmed
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council
Minutes of June 21 & July 5, 1994 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS None
PRESENTATIONS None
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mr. John Curtis, President of La Quinta Rotary Club, presented the City a check in the amount
of $4,000 for the purpose of helping finance the Kennedy sculpture for the Civic Center.
Mayor Pena, expressed gratitude on behalf of th City for the Rotary Club's donation.
Ms. Barbara Padilla, 52-105 Avenida Martinez, as a team member of the La Quinta Broncos
All-Star Team, addressed the Council requesting financial assistance for the team to attend the
National Championship Tournament in Marion, Illinois. She was accompanied by several fellow
team members. She stated that the tournament would be held on August 3 7 and will need
approximately $10,000 for the expenses of the trip for th entire team and wou? appreciate any
financial assistance the City might give. She said they were aware of the Ci?'s fund request
process but because the championship games would be held in approximately two weeks, there
was not enough time to wait for the process and were only now requesting the assistance because
they had just found out on July 18th that they were the Western Region Champions
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 2 July 19, 1994
Mrs. Mary Padilla, representing the team's Coach, stated that the team members are required
to seek fund assistance themselves. They have some promised donations already and are
receiving assistance through some businesses.
Mayor Pena advised that the City had recently adopted a grant-funding process due to the large
number of worthy causes that come before the Council seeking fund assistance.
Mrs. Padilla said the financial assistance is needed immediately to purchase airfare and to make
hotel reservations. In response to Mayor Pena she advised that the requested funds would be
used to cover expenses for the 14 team members only and that all parents attending would pay
their own expenses. She added that the girls parents are making contributions to help as well
and were not looking for 100% funding assistance.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised this is a policy
issue and that the present difficulty is, that even if the application was processed and presented
to the Council on August 2nd, it would be too late for the team.
Council Member Sniff suggested the item be added to the agenda as a Business Item.
Council concurred.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to add the request for financial
assistance by the La Quinta Broncos, being of an urgency narure, to the agenda as Business Item
No. 9, to be continued until the evening session if needed. Motion carried unanimously.
MINUTE ORDER NO.94-168.
Mayor Pena advised the team representatives that the Council would notify them what time they
should plan to return to further discuss the issue if the item is continued to the evening session.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE None
BUSINESS SESSION
1. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
FISCAL YEAR 1994/95 BUDGET.
Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the Council had provided Staff with direction
at the June 20th Special Meeting regarding the Fiscal Year 1994/95 Budget. Subsequent
events and changes, as discussed with the City Council, have been included and
incorporated into the final budget and are outlined in the staff report. The fiscal year
budget resolution includes the estimated continuing of appropriations and encumbrances.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 3 July 19, 1994
The continuing appropriations are approved, but unspent funds from the previous fiscal
year and the encumbrances are current vendor contracts that have been executed.
Council Member Sniff stated that he had requested an outline and summary of the
recreation programs and that Council had indicated previously that they wanted as many
of these programs to be self-funding as possible. He said he had no problem with any
particular program, but that his understanding was that Council had not fully defined
whether or not to fund all of the programs initially or use some discretion in deciding
which ones to go forward with.
Mayor Pena said his concern was that some of the programs were being advertised
before funding was approved and asked Staff for clarification.
Mr. Genovese advised that the Council had requested that the Airline Task Force and
Regional Business Center come back to them prior to execution of any invoices and
payment, but that the recreation programs be watched as they go forward, not
withholding funding. Some of the programs have been advertised, many of which are
Leisure Enrichment Programs, and are self-funded.
Council Member Perkins said the budget was very readable and he was pleased with it.
Council Member McCartney concurred with Council Member Perkins and expressed
appreciation to Staff for the summary on Attorney Services. He voiced concern on the
amount projected for attorney services and hoped the expenditures would come in below
budget.
In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Genovese advised that the recreation program items
would not come back to Council as line-by-line' items prior to approval of expenditures
because they will all be represented in one recreation brochure. He noted however, that
if there isn't sufficient interest in a program, it won't proceed.
Council complimented Staff on the budget, expressing appreciation for its readability.
Council also concurred that Staff keep Council informed on the success of the recreation
programs and report quarterly on City Attorney costs.
RESOLUTION NO.94-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994/95.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to approve and adopt Resolution
No.94-47 Motion carried unanimously.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 4 July 19, 1994
2. CONSIDERATION OF FISCAL YEAR 1994/95 IN??INVESTMENT POLICY OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA/LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/LA QUINTA
FINANCING AUTHORITY.
Mr. Parzonko, Finance Director, advised that the Investment Advisory Board JAB)
prepared a draft investment policy with the primary objective being the safety of the
City's funds. Highlights of the policy include: an investment portfolio composition,
reporting, internal controls, and delegation of duties. Revisions have been made to the
policy after being reviewed by the City Manager and City Attorney. Included in these
revisions are: the removal of bankers acceptances and commercial paper to make the
policy even more conservative, and; addition of contacting the National Association of
Security Dealers to obtain a disclosure report of any companies or individuals that will
be providing investment services for the City of La Quinta. He stated that the
Investment Advisory Board Chairman, Tom Lewis, was present and available for
answering any questions.
In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Parzonko explained that the statement
on Attachment A, page 1, A) the City shall have 100% of City funds invested", means
that all of the City's funds will be invested, including such funds as checking accounts,
which can be placed where they will earn interest, maximizing interest earnings.
Council Member Bangerter asked how much input the Council has in the implementation
of the investment policy, such as where the funds will be invested.
Mr. Parzonko responded that would depend upon the direction of Council to the JAB.
Part of the JAB's function will be to devise investment strategy, once the policy is
adopted.
Mr. Genovese advised that each time there is an agreement, such as the RFP process
with a new banking service, it will come before the Council for consideration and
approval.
Council Member McCartney expressed concern that the Certificate of Deposits CD's)
investments in excess of $100,000 could consistently be invested with the same
investment agency if it is the highest bidder"; therefore putting all our eggs in one
basket". That may be best from a return standpoint, but he wasn't sure that it'S the best
policy.
Mr. Parzonko agreed and advised there is an investment diversification plan in the policy
that limits what percentage of the portfolio can be invested and a stand can be taken that
the City will only invest up to a maximum of $100,000 per individual banking institution,
insuring coverage under FDIC.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 5 July 19, 1994
Mr. Genovese advised that additional and different types of collateral would be required
for CD's in excess of $100,000. Although not addressed in this policy, when utilizing
the market in that analysis process, the plan would be to not place all the CD's with one
institution. One reason for diversification is to insure access to the funds, in the event
an institution is experiencing difficulties.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Parzonko advised that the diversification
policy" is defined on page 8 and identifies the investment type, with the maximum
percentage that it can represent of the portfolio.
Council Member Perkins believed that the authority to invest the majority of City funds
in any particular institution, should be the Council's only.
In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Genovese concurred that in the case of Steve Wymer,
he had control of less than 30% of the portfolio. He said that one purpose regarding the
Government Pool being at 100% is that most of the City funds are with LAIF, because
they are a sound investment.
Council Member Perkins felt the investment policy was excellent but wished to have
some type of guaranteed protection against one person or small group being able to invest
the funds in an unprotected investment. He believed the actions with the investments
should come back to the Council for review.
Mayor Pena concurred and stated that all the recommendations do come back to the
Council in the form of a report from the Investment Policy Committee.
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that the monthly Treasurer's Report also reflects
an allocation where the current investments are and can be raised as an issue for
discussion if there is a concern.
Mayor Pena stated that, although a 100% guarantee cannot be obtained, having liquidity
with a minimum risk, is the City's objective.
Mr. Parzonko concurred and advised that Staff's objective is to try to minimize the risk,
taking delivery of the securities whenever it is the appropriative investment that is being
acquired. Government Pools have strict standards as well, to avoid unfortunate losses.
The percentage could be reduced on Government Pools if the Council wishes.
Mr. Genovese, advised that the City, during the last six years. has had no more than
20% of its portfolio in CD's. The allowable" percentages are only for flexibility so as
to maximize the investment. He stated that if the Council is concerned, there is a certain
amount of flexibility regarding those and could eliminate 100% investment in any one
fund.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 6 July 19, 1994
Council Member Perkins said that would make him more comfortable and then Staff
could always come back to the Council if there would be some case where they might
want to invest 100%. He suggested possibly decreasing the Government Pool to 85%.
Mr. Genovese requested that Council continue this item until the August 2nd meeting,
giving Staff time to review the percentages and adjust per the Council's concerns.
Council Member McCartney stated he wasn't sure the percentages were so important but
rather where the investments are ultimately placed, emphasizing the return and safety of
each investment. He requested the lAB report back to the Council what their investment
strategy might be over the next six months to a year; where they might invest and how
sound the investment is.
Council Member Sniff stated he had full confidence in the lAB and had no problem with
the proposed policy. He felt Council's insistence upon diversification has been
adequately addressed in the policy and that the Council should not be micro-managing.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Parzonko advised that there has not been a
lot of activity in the investment program, as we were waiting to develop an investment
policy and strategy prior to investing of funds. Due to the recent increase in interest
rates, it might be a good time to investigate alternative investments, but the better
investment has been" Government-Pooled funds like LAIF. He felt the City would
actually have a passive portfolio, making changes infrequently.
Council Member Perkins stated he didn't believe the Council's review was micro-
managing, noting that it had been reviewed by the lAB, the City Manager, City Attorney
and now the Council. He felt like the policy suggests that City funds could,
conceivably", be placed all within a Government Pool and he did not agree with that
concept.
In response to Council Member Bangerter, Ms. Honeywell advised that the changes in
investments will only come back to the Council by way of the monthly report, after the
fact, not for prior approval. The policy is designed so that the City's Finance Director,
in conjunction with the lAB, can go ahead with investments, per the policies outlines.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Parzonko stated the next lAB meeting would
be held on July 20th.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to continue this item to
the August 2, 1994 meeting and direct Staff to take this issue to the Investment Advisory
Board meeting on July 20th, with the primary aim of reconsidering the percentages.
Council Member Bangerter reiterated that she felt the policy had been well prepared and
the requested review was not reflective upon the quality of the work of the lAB.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 7 July 19, 1994
Council Member Perkins concurred and expressed appreciation for a very fine policy that
he felt was long overdue.
Council Member Sniff suggested the Finance Director give a brief summary at each
Council meeting, summarizing the investment status.
In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Parzonko advised that the purpose of
not exceeding a four-year investment, is to have a liquid portfolio. Each investment
would need to be evaluated as to credit-market conditions.
Council Member McCartney said his concern was that the City not get trapped into a
lower yield if not necessary.
Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-169.
3. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON A
REQUEST BY KSL RECREATION CORPORATION FOR PLOT PLAN 94-527,
TO DEVELOP A 27,OOOt SQ.FT. CLUBHOUSE AT THE CITRUS COUNTRY
CLUB ON S ACRES AT 50-503 JEFFERSON STREET.
Mr. Jerry Herman, Planning Director, advised that KSL Corporation is requesting to
construct a 27,000 sq.ft. clubhouse at the Citrus Country Club. The application was
approved by the Planning Commission on July 12, 1994, with no opposition to the
request. He advised that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the
La Quinta Municipal Code and presented the Council with various views of the
architectural drawings and plot plan.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Staff gave directions for orientation of the
project.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to accept the report of
the Planning Commission's action on the request by KSL Corporation for Plot Plan 94-
527 to develop a 27,000+ sq. ft. clubhouse at the Citrus Country Club on eight acres
at 50-503 Jefferson Street. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-
170.
4. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON
PLOT PLAN 88-398, AMENDMENT NO.1; TO INSTALL A GOLF BALL
BARRIER ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF WESTWARD HO DRIVE FOR THE
LA QUINTA GOLF RANCH; APPLICANT: GARRY HOPKINS.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 8 July 19, 1994
Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that the Garry Hopkins Golf School was
approved in 1988 and the current request is for an amendment to the approved Plot Plan
to allow installation of a golf ball barrier along the south side of La Quinta Golf Ranch
on Westward Ho Drive. The La Quinta High School is located across from the La
Quinta Golf Ranch on the south side of Westward Ho Drive and has requested this golf
ball barrier as a safety device to protect students and is participating in the cost of the
barrier. The poles that hold the tting will be located on a berm, 14 feet back from the
edge of the right-of-way, along with five-gallon minimum) oleanders, as conditioned by
the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
amendment and there was no opposition at that meeting.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Herman advised that the applicant has revised
his irrigation plan to allow adequate watering for the oleanders through a drip system.
Council Member Mccartney asked Staff what the height of the netting would be and
what type of poles would be used.
Mr. Herman advised that the netting would be 20' above the berm and the poles are
conditioned to be galvanized metal.
Council Member Sniff expressed concern that the netting would begin to sag in the 75-
foot span between poles, and be unsightly.
Mr. Herman stated that the netting would be installed in sections, allowing replacement
as needed between poles.
Mayor Pena said he would prefer to see the netting being replaced rather than requiring
more poles.
Mr. Garry Hopkins, applicant, advised that each section is framed up with airplane
cable and hooked with marine cables through the netting, thus reducing sagging.
In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Hopkins stated that the only color available for the
netting is black which is considered to have the least visual resistance by the
manufacturer.
Council Member McCartney questioned the number of balls we're talking about and if
the height of the netting was sufficient.
Mr. Hopkins responded that there won't be a substantial number of balls and the
proposed 20-foot height, above the berm, satisfied the concerns of the school district.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 9 July 19, 1994
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to accept the report of
the Planning Commission's action on Plot Plan 88-398, Amendment No.1, to install a
golf ball barrier along the south side of the La Quinta Golf Ranch on Westward Ho
Drive. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-171.
5. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING NEW
COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY PRACTICES FOR MULTI-CHANNEL
SERVICE PROVIDERS.
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that this matter was continued from the June 21st
Council meeting to give Colony CableVision time to give specific responses to the
proposed ordinance. She recommended the matter be continued to the August 2, 1994
Council meeting to give Staff adequate time to review the extensive comments received
on July 7th from Colony CableVision.
Council Member McCartney expressed concern over the extensiveness of the proposed
ordinance and questioned whether it would change the City's position if adopted.
Ms. Honeywell advised the proposed ordinance should significantly enhance the City's
regulatory powers in respect to this type of regulation, noting that in the past, we have
not attempted to regulate it in as extensive a manner. The Federal Government
empowers the City to have the ability to regulate these services if there is an ordinance
that puts it in place.
Council Member McCartney asked if the ordinance was all inclusive, covering all
territory needing coverage.
Ms. Honeywell, replied that the City hired a consultant who specializes in this field to
insure that we have a state of the art" ordinance, with respect our ability to regulate and
that is in compliance with all the latest federal requirements.
Mayor Pena voiced concern that the City not be spending funds for blazing new trails"
along these new areas of regulating multi-channel service providers, which may not make
any difference in the end.
Ms. Honeywell advised that the ordinance needed updating due to the new Cable Act,
which just became effective in the Fall of 1993. Therefore, everyone will be blazing
new trails" due to new federal regulations. An important part of the new regulation was
to empower local entities to be able to have more control and more demand over the
services at a local level. Some of the changes in the ordinance are a reflection of this
new power given to cities, most of which apply to servicing for consumers.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 10 July 19, 1994
Council Member McCartney acknowledged he did not have the expertise to judge the
technical aspects or legality of the ordinance, but felt that the ordinance needed more
work in the service standards" portion and wanted sufficient time for review, to be
comfortable with the specificity in the standards of customer service. He wasn't sure that
an ordinance was the proper means by which to measure customer satisfaction.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that requests have been
made to obtain copies of ordinances from the other valley cities, but noted that since the
new federal regulations had only been changed last Fall, it was unlikely any of these
ordinances have been updated.
Council Member Perkins stated he was concerned over the length of the 47-page
document and suggested two weeks might not be sufficient time to review the comments
by Colony CableVision and asked if it was necessary to push forward so quickly.
Ms. Honeywell advised that the current franchise expires in December, 1994, which can
be extended on a month-to-month basis. However, we gave ourselves a time-frame of
two years for renegotiating the franchise which we're now a year and a half into.
Failure to adopt the regulatory standards allowed, can be changed by later federal
changes in the regulations where they grandfather in" previously adopted statues. She
said the Council may use their discretion in choosing to exercise the control that has been
given, including regulating rates, which is also now allowed by the new federal law.
In response to Mayor Pena, Ms. Honeywell advised that she felt the additional two weeks
would be adequate time to review the comments and could request a further continuance
at that time, if needed.
Council Member Sniff wished to see the matter continued to August 2nd as requested,
rather than debate it at this time when no one has had an opportunity to study it or to
review the comments of Colony CableVision. This is a transition time and this
ordinance, whatever it will be, will position the City to deal effectively with these issues.
Council Member McCartney concurred with continuing the matter to August 2nd, but
expressed concern that the document may be a 47-page monster", that will be difficult
to implement and costly to defend. He was in favor of controlling cable services, but
questioned the necessity of a 47-page document.
Council Member Perkins understood the City may be blazing new trails", but believe
Staff should review other city's ordinances and find Out if any have been adopted in
relation to the new federal regulations. He also said he wasn't too concerned with trying
to make changes prior to any federal government changes, due to the fact they can
choose to grandfather in" your changes and later change. He did not want Staff to feel
compelled to come back in two weeks with an ordinance that has to be adopted at that
time
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 11 July 19,1994
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to continue consideration
of adoption of new comprehensive regulatory practices for multi-channel service
providers until August 2, 1994. Motion carried unanimously MINUTE ORDER NO.
9?172
6. CONSIDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
ALBERT WEBB AND ASSOCIATES TO PREPARE A PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT FORMATION REPORT FOR THE HIGHWAY 111
COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that on May 17th, Council had directed
Staff to negotiate a Professional Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc., which
would combine the engineering efforts of the Highway 111 widening project with the
Phase I Washington Street project. He said that negotiations have been completed, and
the agreement is split into three areas: 1) production of plan specs and engineers
estimates for the Washington Street widening portion of the project for $93,620; 2)
adding the required engineering services for right-of-way acquisition necessary for
Highway 111 widening for $1 1,720; 3) engineering services for right-of-way acquisition
activities, if needed, to separate the Washington Street widening project from the
Highway 111 project if there are funding problems with the Washington Street widening
project, for $20,860. The total contract amount is $126,200, a savings of $130,000, by
combining the two projects.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the proposal initially,
is to have bus turnouts on each leg of the intersection and have a transfer point on Simon
Drive sometime in the future when the widenings are completed, if a full right-in, right-
out, left-in, left-out intersection is provided south of Simon Drive.
RESOLUTION 94-48
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THAT THE USE OF AGENCY FUNDS FOR
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IS OF PUBLIC BENEFIT TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND TIlE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD IN
WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AND DETERMINING THAT THERE ARE
NO OTHER REASONABLE MEANS OF FINANCING SAID PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to adopt Resolution No.94-48 as
submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 12 July 19, 1994
It was moved by Council Members SnifflMcCartney to authorize the Mayor to execute
a Professional Services Agreement with Hall and Foreman, Inc., related to the
Washington Street Widening Phase 1 construction documents. Motion carried
unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-173.
7. CONSIDERATION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
ALBERT WEBB AND ASSOCIATES TO PREPARE A PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT FORMATION REPORT FOR THE HIGHWAY 111
COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
Mr. Cosper. Public Works Director, advised that on June 22, 1994, the Consultant
Selection Committee for the Preliminary Assessment Formation Report, reviewed
proposals and qualifications from four consultants and selected the firm of Albert A.
Webb Associates as the firm, best qualified to prepare the Report. The report has been
requested by property owners along Highway 111 to generate information to allow them
to proceed with a decision on whether or not to proceed with an assessment district. The
negotiated contract is for a not to exceed the amount of $10,500, of which 90% is to be
funded by property owners, with the remaining 10% to be funded by the City.
Mayor Pena expressed appreciation to the property owners and Chris Clark for heading
up the formation of the assessment group.
Ms. Chris Clark, came forward and reported that she had checks and/or commitments
representing 274.35 acres of 486.99 acres. Some of the property owners agreeing to
participate are WalMart, Albertsons, and Auto Club. She has been unable to contact
some of the property owners and another one initially agreed but has since backed out.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members SnifflMcCartney to approve a
Professional Services Agreement with Albert A. Webb Associates to prepare the
Preliminary Assessment Formation Report for the Highway 111 Commercial Corridor
Assessment District at a cost not to exceed $1,050. Motion carried unanimously.
MINUTE ORDER NO.94-174.
8. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT ON EVALUATION OF RECENTLY-INSTALLED
TRAFFIC STRIPING AND SIGNING OF PARK AVENUE.
Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the issue at hand has been brought up
several times by residents located in the area around Park Avenue, between Calle
Tampico and Avenue 50. The three main issues of concern have been the type of traffic
and the noise level produced, vehicle speeds, and the limited vision of the intersection
at Park Avenue and Painted Cove. A truck-route ordinance was adopted in January
1994, limiting traffic on Park Avenue, signage has been installed, and school-bus traffic
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8
City Council Minutes 13 July 19, 1994
reduced to only one bus a day. The speed limit was previously reduced from 45 MPH
to 35 MPH and traffic controls have been installed to reduce the speed; these being two
flashing-caution-beacons before the Park Avenue and Painted Cove intersection, shoulder
striping, cross-traffic ahead signs, and 25 MPH speed signs. Recent speed surveys report
that speeds have been effectively reduced from the previous 44 MPH to 41 MPH.
Adequate warning has been provided through signage and pavement markings, in both
directions, at the Park Avenue and Painted Canyon intersection. Mr. Cosper advised that
Staff recommends no changes in the striping or signage at the present time but will
continue monitoring this intersection for the next six months as the population in the area
increases, increasing traffic.
Council Member Perkins asked if striping would remain the same if a stop sign should
be deemed necessary in the future and if so, suggested that additional cross-striping be
done. He noted that additional striping might also be needed on Washington Street
before Eisenhower Drive, due to drivers thinking that, that area is a right-turn-lane.
Council Member Sniff believed that the City's efforts on Park Avenue have been very
effective.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter that no additional
changes be implemented at this time and direct Staff to continue monitoring traffic safety
conditions and vehicle speeds, including speed limit enforcement, on Park Avenue and
report back to the Council in January, 1995.
Council Member Bangerter. stated she also felt the changes have been effective and
believes a stop sign at the Park Avenue and Painted Canyon intersection could be a
disaster.
In response to Council Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that there has been no feedback
from the residents since the changes have been put in place.
Council Member Perkins requested Council Member Sniff to amend the motion to permit
the additional cross-striping.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Cosper advised that he intended to investigate
the request and go forward with it if possible.
Council Member Sniff amended his motion to include that if it is determined by the City
Engineer, that the cross-striping is an appropriate action, that it be done
Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-175.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 14 July 19, 1994
9. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING REQUEST FROM LA QUINTA BRONCO'S
ALL STAR BASEBALL TEAM.
It was moved by Council Members Smif/Bangerter to continue Item No.9 to the evening
session. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-176.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER, DATED JULY 19, 1994.
2. ACCEPTANCE OF AVENUE 50 AND EISENHOWER DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO.92-10.
3. APPROVAL OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TO PARTICIPATE IN A MORTGAGE CREDIT CERTIFICATE PROGRAM;
AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION TO
THE CALIFORNIA DEBT LIMIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE TO BE
SUBMITTED BY RIVERSIDE COUNTY. RES)
4. APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE
COUNTY FOR THE USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDS FOR THE LA QUINTA SENIOR CENTER CONSTRUCTION.
5. APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 1994/95 GANN LIMIT APPROPRIATION
CALCULATION. RES)
6. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PURCHASE
CERTAIN ITEMS FOR THE CITY. RES)
7. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN FROM THE CITY'S
GENERAL FUND TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY'S PROJECT AREA
NOS. 1 AND 2. RES-2)
8. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR ASSISTANT TO THE CITY
MANAGER TO PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, AUGUST 3 AND 4, 1994 FOR THE
MMASC ANNUAL CONFERENCE.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Bangerter/McCartney to approve the
Consent Calendar as submitted, with Item Nos. 3, 5, 6, and 7 being approved by
RESOLUTION NOS. 9?49, 94-50, 94-51, 94-52 AND 94-53 respectively. Motion
carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-177.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 15 July 19, 1994
STUDY SESSION
1. DISCUSSION OF AIRTOUCH CELLULAR PROPOSAL TO LOCATE A
CELLULAR MONOPOLE AND EQUIPMENT AT THE FOR SPORTS
COMPLEX.
Ms. Francisco, Recreation Supervisor, asked that Council provide Staff direction toward
proceeding further with a proposal from AirTouch Cellular for placement of a 100 foot
monopole and an equipment container on a 50-foot X 50-foot area at the La Quinta
Sports Complex site. AirTouch Cellular proposes to pay all costs relating to installation
of the monopole and equipment container, including permits and installation
requirements. She advised that the Staff Report includes a Letter of Understanding,
permitting AirTouch Cellular to test the site for feasibility of constructing an operating
communications facility on the Site and agreeing to enter into negotiations for locating
a monopole at the Sports Complex, should the feasibility study permit the installation.
The City Attorney has received all documentation and is aware of the content of the
letters and agreements.
Ms. Alisha Kenny, representative for Air?Cellular, presented Council with
photographs of existing monopoles on other sites, noting that they have replaced previous
light standards with their own light standards, which their wires and antennas can be
attached to. The Sports Complex was chosen because it is the best area according to
their engineers, which is not residential or golf course and because the monopoles would
blend in with the surrounding poles on the site. They prefer 100-foot poles, but if that
is a problem, it can be discussed with their engineers.
In response to further questioning, Ms. Kenny advised that the proposal of $500 monthly
for the lease payment is negotiable. She advised that oftentimes, amenities such as
restrooms, landscaping, etc., have been installed in lieu of the lease payment. She was
not sure of the number of customers that would be served by this additional equipment.
Regarding the 50' X 50' area needed, she advised that a 22' X 22' equipment room is
necessary, which could be constructed underground. Once conceptual approval of the
City is obtained, they would then proceed with negotiations with the school district.
Council Member McCartney advised that he did not vote in favor of the previous PacTel
request for an antenna and would not vote for this one, because he was not happy with
tall antennas or similar objects. However, if approved, he wished to see a franchise fee
established as opposed to a lease payment.
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she would investigate the possibility of
regulating this type of usage but didn't believe the FCC allows local regulation because
the usage is of airwaves'?, as opposed to cable conduit. However, there may be more
control in this case, due to the request by AirTouch to sub-lease the site.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 16 July 19, 1994
Council Member McCartney asked Ms. Honeywell if there would be any power to
regulate this type of use within the new communications act.
Ms. Honeywell said she would research it but did not believe so.
Mayor Pena was concerned with the statement in the report that one or two microwave
dishes and whips might also be located on the pole depending on system requirements
and we currently don't know what those system requirements are; therefore, we do not
know what will be on the pole.
Ms. Kenny advised that the letter contains their wish list?', but that it is negotiable.
Council Member Bangerter expressed concern about adding the equipment container to
the Sports Complex because of the extensive use it gets. She asked if the ground on top
would be a usable area if the equipment container was located underground, and how
often would it need to be accessed.
Ms. Kenny advised that access would only be needed once every several months, for
maintenance only, and the only portion above-ground would be a small box hatch, used
to gain access to the container. The preferred placement would be on the far side of the
property next to the fence.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Kenny advised that the project would move
forward as soon as permits are obtained and would take approximately four to seven
weeks to construct, depending upon above- or below-ground construction.
Council Member Sniff verified with Ms. Kenny that AirTouch Cellular is open to
negotiation on the annual fee or lease amount. He expressed concern that upon approval
of this project, the City would be opening a door for another applicant to want the next
light standard, thus replacing many light standards with these equipment poles.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Kenny advised that there are only two cellular
companies in Southern California.
Council Member Sniff stated he would entertain a proposal to work with the City's
Planning Department on the concept, allowing the applicant to submit further information
to answer Council's concerns, including the income base to be received by the City
yearly.
Council Member McCartney asked the applicant to also submit any survey information
available to them regarding the health issue, as it pertains to microwave dishes and
children, noting there has been concern over this issue in northern California.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 17 July 19, 1994
In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that since
the City is the lessee of the property, the City would handle the negotiations with the
school district. If the Council should decide, after the next Study Session, that it is
interested in going forward with the proposal, the City would then negotiate with the
school district to gain approval for the City to sub-lease this site; thus most likely
resulting in the school district sharing in the lease or annual fee received from the
applicant.
Council concurred on continuing this matter to August 2.1994.
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
All reports were noted and filed.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she conducted a workshop on the Brown Act and
Conflict of Interest with the Planning Commissioners July 12th. She will be making another
presentation on July 26th, for all other commissioners and interested council members.
Mrs. Juhola, Administrative Services Director, announced that the Boys & Girls Club would
be having their Grand Opening on July 20th at 10:00 a.m.
Mr. Hartung, Building and Safety Director, responded to Council Member Bangerter's inquiry
regarding his report on Mandatory Refuse Collection, and stated that he felt the twice-weekly
collection requirement, as it relates to the construction industry, is definitely beneficial, keeping
the job sites cleaner. He stated it was especially beneficial during the framing phase, but unsure
if it is worth the extra expense, from the contractor's point of view. It is easier to enforce than
the subjective requirement of as needed".
Council concurred on trying a once-a-week collection for economic reasons and directed Staff
to revise the ordinance for their review and consideration.
Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised Council, regarding his written report on proposed
street improvements in the Washington Street vicinity, that he would study the proposal for a
central bus transfer site on Simon Drive and request SunLine Transit to respond with comments.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 18 July 19,1994
There were additional written department reports from Building and Safety and Parks and
Recreation.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER'S ITEMS
Council Member Bangerter suggested that the City Attorney be allowed to use one of the
vacant offices in the administration area, to allow her more room and privacy, and also making
the library more accessible.
Council concurred on leaving that determination to the City Manager.
Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting.
Council recessed to Closed Session and until the hour o? 7:00 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with Real Property Negotiator Tim Ealey southwest corner of Highway
111 and Jefferson Street Midland Properties negotiations for proposal for commercial
development including price, term of payment pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8.
2. Conference with Legal Counsel Existing Litigation PriMerit Bank pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9.
3. Conference with Legal Counsel Existing Litigation Mojave Equipment Company,
Inc. Riverside County Court Case No.251997.
4. Discussion under Government Code Section 54957 Concerning items relating to City
Manager's performance evaluation.
5. Discussion under 54957.6(b) Concerning negotiation of legal services contract re: City
Attorney/Agency Legal Counsel.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 19 July 19, 1994
7:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Joseph Irwin, of 44-065 Camino La Cresta, came forward to make comments on the
Investment Policy but deferred them after Mayor Pena informed him that Council had continued
the item to August 2nd and referred the policy back to the Investment Advisory Board meeting
of July 20th.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-012 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-013;
CONSIDERATION OF CUP'S TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN
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 the proposed project is a golf driving range
surrounded by a Recreational Vehicle RV) Park, located at the southeast corner of
Washington Street and Miles Avenue. The area was approved previously for 550-
apartment units and a seven-acre commercial site. The seven-acre commercial parcel
was reverted back to a high-density designation, permitting 12?16 units per acre.
He reviewed the landscaping and elevation plans, noting the 20-foot setback requirement
from the perimeter wall for RV's. The setback requirements consist of 12 feet for the
parkway, 20 feet for landscaping, and an additional 20-foot setback behind a six-foot
perimeter wall. From a visual perspective, he noted that, due to the six-foot wall and
landscaping, a 12-foot high RV has very little visibility from Miles Avenue, and is also
precluded from sight on Washington Street due to the elevational changes. On the
easterly property line the setback is 10 feet with a ten-foot wall. The differences in
elevations between the Washington Street bridge and the RV Park, were noted as 80 for
the bridge and 101 for the RV Park. The RV's, nor the 80-foot-high, ball-barrier
netting, will be visible from Washington Street and visibility is also reduced by
landscaping.
The previous concerns of Council were relat?d to the lighting plan, and the landscaping
and poles at the driving range. Mr. Herman advised that the applicant has revised the
lighting plan to reflect ground lighting, as opposed to pole lighting. There is proposed
lighting on top of the two-story building directed down into the golf driving range with
a light pole at the grass tees, directing light into the driving range. Staff has examined
the possibility of that light shining into motorist on Highway 111, but has concluded that
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 20 July 19, 1994
light cannot reach a direct line at that distance.
In regards to the landscaping concerns, the applicant has proposed to plant palm trees,
ranging from a 10-foot minimum brown trunk to a 50-foot height, staggered by the poles.
Additionally, he proposed to plant various types of trees to alleviate the visibility, of
which 75% will be 24 boxed trees or larger, and 25% will be 15-gallon minimum trees.
The proposed clubhouse is two-story with grass tees for the driving range on either side.
There are 356 RV pads and 78 grass tees proposed.
The project was approved by the Planning Commission on June 14, 1994, and all
property owners within 300-foot radius were notified of the hearing by mail, as well as
the homeowner association representatives on file. The Council previously approved a
change of zone, eliminating commercial designations, and adopted a zoning ordinance
amendment regarding RV standards. Conditions have been added to the project to reflect
the concerns of Council regarding lighting, landscaping, and phasing improvements.
In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Herman advised that the top of the
clubhouse would be visible from Miles Avenue but referred to the applicant for better
clarification.
Council Member Sniff asked if the golf-ball-barrier netting would be visible from the
streets at any point, noting the vast difference in elevations. He questioned the elevation
difference from the southerly-most portion of the property to the northerly-most portion.
Mr. Herman advised that the applicant would be able to respond more accurately.
In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Herman advised that Inco Homes plans
a 300 single-family development on the adjacent property to the east and supports the
proposed project. To the north is the Acacia residential area and a mobile home park
and a continuation of the Deane Tract.
Council Member McCartney asked if the Deane Tract proposes to construct two-story
units and how much visibility would there be of the proposed project from the second
floor, to which Mr. Herman responded there would be some visibility, although it would
be some distance away. There are no two-story homes proposed in the Inco
Development.
Mr. Joe Richards, consultant with Richards, Mueting & Wilkes, 6529 Riverside
Avenue, Suite 115, Riverside, representing the applicant, advised that the proposed
project is a 356-space RV Park and golf-driving range with 78 tees. The applicant
proposes to include amenities such as, tennis courts, shuffle board courts, spas, and three
pools and is intended as a first-class RV Resort and not a trailer park??. The RV Park
will be a non-membership park, and the spaces will not be for sale, with rentals limited
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 21 July 19, 1994
to a maximum of six months, per the City's ordinance. The expected average space
rental will be two weeks to three months. No park models, tent trailers, nor RV's less
than 20 feet, will be permitted. The proposed 12,000 sq.ft. clubhouse will provide a golf
shop, activity room, outdoor patio, restaurant, and interior rental and office spaces.
There will be a three-hole executive golf course in the flood channel area with a plan to
expand to nine holes in the future, if permitted by CVWD.
In addressing the Council's concerns, the setbacks have been revised to reflect almost 50
feet from the first RV space to the curb. The easterly-boundary setbacks have been set
at 10 feet and meet the approval of the adjacent property owner, Inco Homes. The
perimeter wall, along Washington Street and Miles Avenue, greatly reduces the visual
sight of the RV's and the landscaping enhances that screening. In regards to the view
from Washington Street, as you travel northbound across the bridge, there will be
minimal viewing of some RV's but will be screened greatly by landscaping and will also
be buffered with the three-hole executive course.
There will be netting on three sides of the driving range. On the west and east sides, the
netting will vary in height and stair-step from 25 feet to a maximum of 80 feet, as
recommended by the manufacturer, for safety and liability purposes. The poles will be
located approximately 40 feet apart. Palm trees will be planted to assist in camouflaging
the poles, which tend to be what is seen as opposed to the netting, which appears to
disappear at a distance.
He advised that the revised lighting, which calls for ground lighting as opposed to pole
lighting, will be protected from glaring into the public streets by use of berms and
housing them in bunkers". Although there will be a halo effect", as within any night-
lighted area, there will be no direct lighting into residential areas.
The applicant does not propose phasing" the project, but would like to get the driving
range underway before beginning the RV Park and understands the conditions that
require that landscaping and improvements must be completed at the beginning of the
project.
Mr. Richards advised that four meetings have been held with residents from Acacia,
Topaz and Quinterra developments to address their concerns relating to the lighting,
netting and screening of the proposed project and felt like those concerns have been
addressed.
Council Member Perkins verified with Mr. Richards that Washington Street and Miles
Avenue improvements and perimeter landscaping will be installed at the same time that
any portion of the proposed project begins.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Richards stated that the meetings with the
residents within the surrounding developments, had been set up through contacts given
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 22 July 19, 1994
to them by Staff, with those contacts notifying other residents. These meetings were held
in private homes within the development areas and were attended by 15 to 20 people,
with some of those attending more than one meeting.
Council Member McCartney asked how many additional public- parking spaces will be
provided beyond the proposed 356 RV Park spaces.
Mr. Richards advised that 129 public-parking spaces are proposed at the clubhouse and
driving range, with some additional RV stacking spaces that will convert to automobile
spaces after 6 p.m. for additional evening parking. RV Park registration hours will be
from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. only.
In response to Council Members McCartney, Mr. Richards advised that most of the RV
Park will be rented through advance reservations; therefore, the 6 p.m.?registration
closing should not be a problem.
Council Member Sniff suggested that maybe late registration could be handled at the
gate, to which Mr. Richards responded there would be an attendant on duty on a 24-hour
basis.
In response to Council Member McCartney, Mr. Richards advised that the ground
lighting bulb wattage is proposed at 1000 watts each. There will be 16 ground-mounted
lights within bunkers, four roof-mounted lights on the clubhouse building, and two pole
lights over the tees on the wings of the building. They are also working on low?profile
lighting for the parking lot with some type of pole lighting as well, for security purposes.
The tennis-court pole lighting is planned for 10 feet high, depending on the outcome of
the elevation. Mr. Richards advised that he was unsure how many pole lights are
proposed for the parking lot area but will find out.
In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Richards advised that each light bunker will
house one light only, with six bunkers spaced across the tee area.
Council Member Perkins asked if the park would be an independent park or part of a
chain to which Mr. Richards responded that it would be independent.
Council Member Sniff expressed concern over the possibility of the netting sagging
between the 40-foot spans.
Mr. Richards advised that the netting would be held up with cable across the top that
would stretch from pole to pole.
In response to Council Member Mccartney, Mr. Richards confirmed there are a total of
45 netting poles proposed; 18 on each of the east and west sides with nine on the south
with netting being black in color.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 23 July 19, 1994
Mayor Pena confirmed with Mr. Herman that the proposed netting was the same as
proposed for the La Quinta Golf Ranch project.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC REARING OPEN.
Mr. Dale Jessey, 78-830 Sanita Drive, expressed strong objection to the proposed
project, stressing loss in property values where similar projects have been approved in
other communities, and voiced concern that the proposed lighting would be detrimental
to the dark skies?. He believes that the entire proposed complex will be visible from
his second-story home in La Quinta Del Rey. He stated he left the Moreno Valley area
to get his family away from gangs and believed that to bring in 356 mobile people will
be detrimental to the area.
Mr. John Gallegos, 78-590 Bradford Circle, expressed opposition to the proposed
project, describing as a proposed nuisance in the community. He said he was not
notified of the project until recently, and knew of none of his neighbors that were a part
of the group who met with the consultant at the four meetings. He objected to the halo
effect" lighting and noted that, although the RV's are said to only be 12 feet high, most
are usually top-mounted with satellite dishes that extend above that height. He objected
also to the fact that the people in the RV parks will be transients and not part of the
community.
Ms. Faye Scarpinato, 78-685 Bradford Circle, spoke in opposition to the proposed
project and stated that, she too, was not aware of the proposal until notified by a
neighbor recently, due to the fact her property lies 34 feet beyond the City's 300-foot
radius notification requirement. She noted that the aerial photograph being used to view
the area, is at least 3 years old, and is not a true depiction of the amount of residential
housing now in the area. She believed that an RV resort will destroy the residential
character of the neighborhood.
Mr. Anthony Scarpinato, 78-685 Bradford Circle, was opposed to the proposed project
and felt like his community was a community under siege, because of developers
proposing to change the character of their community by building smaller homes and
commercial properties, that will affect the property values of the present homes. He
believed that a project of this magnitude should have required an Environmental Impact
Report EIR). He requested that the Council, as representatives of the people in the
community, make sure that the communities are preserved. He also expressed
dissatisfaction with the City's 300-foot notification requirement and strongly suggested
that it be revised.
Ms. Lori Scott, 78-800 West Harland, stated that she recently purchased a home in the
Acacia development because of the nature of the community and felt like that would
change if the proposed project is constructed, because the people using the RV Park, will
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 24 July 19, 1994
not have an interest in the community, nor will they be taxpayers who utilize the
businesses in the area.
Mr. Max Flor, 44-790 Seeley Drive, was in opposition to the project, echoing the
concerns already given, and said he also bad just been made aware of the proposal. He
believed the proposal has strong environmental impacts. He questioned the lack of a
right-turn pocket into the project on Washington Street for stacking of the RV's, noting
that the entrance is 900 feet east of Miles Avenue, nor is there a left-turn pocket on
Miles Avenue. He also expressed concern about RV's using his neighborhood as a short-
cut to Fred Waring and avoiding the signalized intersection. He presently can see the
lights from Vons and Albertsons from his two-story home and feared that this project
will glow like a stadium.
Mr. Andrew Devin, 78-815 West Harland, expressed opposition to the proposed project,
stating his bedroom window faces the proposed site. His concern was that the focus had
been directed toward the aesthetics of the project, with no focus on the impact to the
community by the extra traffic, noise, and pollution. He believed there would be no
positive effect upon the community from this project.
Ms. Lisa Devin, 78-815 West Harland Drive, presented the Council with a written
memorandum in opposition to the project. She objected to the fact that there was a lack
of notification of the project to all the property owners in the area. Her concerns were
the increased noise and traffic, glare of the night lighting, loss of property value, and that
it is out of character for the neighborhood. She requested the Council, should it still
consider the project, to continue the case for at least 90 days to give sufficient time to
the residents to review all impact analysis reports available, fully educate themselves
about the project, and allow time to circulate petitions to better inform the Council on
the feelings of the majority of the residents in the area.
Mr. Robert Metkins, spoke in opposition to the proposed project noting objections to
the lighting effect and visual effect of the poles and netting. He commented on the
inadequate parking, noting that many RVs tow an extra automobile. He questioned why
we would want to create a future environment for RVs in the valley when the County is
seeking to tax them out". He stated his two-story home is located in La Quinta
Highlands and did not need junk" in his backyard.
Ms. Patty Stutz, 78-650 Alden Circle, spoke in support of the RV Park and advised that
her and her husband's names were given to Mr. Richards, as area contacts, because of
a previous involvement within the community against another proposed project. She
didn't believe the impact of this proposed project would be any greater than an apartment
complex. She said that after talking to the consultant and reviewing what the alternatives
could be, due to the zoning of that site, the proposed project wasn't bad for the area.
She noted that the single-family homes are increasing in the area, and that traffic,
generated by permanent residents, would be greater than that of the RV park.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 25 3uly 19, 1994
Mr. Fred Farr, 250 E. Rincon Avenue Suite 202, Corona, of Inco Homes stated that
they are currently proposing to develop a 300-lot, one-story, single-family home
development east of the proposed project. They prefer an RV park and driving range
over the previously-approved, 736-unit apartment complex. He stated that their concerns
regarding setbacks and screening have been mitigated through working with the
consultant. Other concerns have been mitigated through the conditions placed by Staff
such as generator use, satellite dishes and antennas on top of RV's, and the disallowing
of any tent trailers. He stated that they did want assurance that the perimeter landscaping
along their common-property boundary on the east, would be addressed during the first
phase of the project.
Mr. Russell Robertson, 44-930 Tortola Circle, stated he too, was opposed to the project
when first made aware of it, but has since sat in on some the meetings held with the
consultant, and has found them to be very willing to work with the concerns of the
residents. He felt the proposed project would offer nice amenities for local residents, as
well as those coming to visit our area. He noted that RVs are, many times, higher
priced than many homes in the area and given the seasonal nature of this type of facility,
any impact to the area would be seasonal.
Mr. Ray Beach, 78-675 Alden Circle, stated that property values have already dropped
25% since word has spread of this proposed project. Due to past experiences with RV
parks, he echoed comments made earlier regarding the effect they have on the
community. He didn't believe there was sufficient clarification on the definition of what
constitutes an RY".
Mr. Doug Elliott, 78-620 Forbes Circle, expressed opposition to the proposed project,
stating he felt it would negatively impact the community. He questioned the ability of
a 20-foot- plus RV being able to negotiate a left turn from Miles Avenue onto
Washington Street, without great difficulty, with the current configuration of the
intersection. He stated he was not notified of the project and felt the notification
procedure should have been better. He felt the space allowed for an RV was not
consistent with the minimum 1400 sq.ft. lot requirements in the adjoining residential
areas. He suggested the Council examine the approved designations for the site and
consider rezoning to allow something other than a 736-unit apartment complex or RV
park.
Mr. Joe Erwin, 44-065 Camino La Cresta, spoke in support of the proposed project
before the Planning Commission, noting the alternative uses for the Site are more
objectionable. Regarding property owner notification, he felt adequate notice had been
given. It was advertized in the newspaper, spoken to twice at Planning Commission
meetings and once at a City Council meeting.
Mr. Dwight Rob, 44-155 Villeta Drive, was concerned with the light pollution from the
RY park and the possible reduction in his property value.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 26 July 19, 1994
Mr. Mark Sarto, 78-820 Saneta Drive, was opposed to the project and felt it would
lessen the value of his property. He was concerned about what type of material would
be used for the poles.
Mr. Kim Virgin, 78-805 West Harland Drive, expressed opposition to the proposed
project due to increased congestion, degrading property values, light pollution and
transient population. He stated that the idea of supporting the project, just because it was
better than the alternative, was not good enough for him. He said the community
currently is a growing community and believed this type of project will stunt" the
growth and diminish the possibilities for future sales; thus lowering the tax base for the
area. Lowering the tax base will cause a loss in revenues that support schools and City
street improvements.
Mr. Jim West, 78-670 Alden Circle, had concerns about the proposed project but
preferred it over an apartment complex. His concerns were related to widening of Miles
Avenue and maneuverability of large vehicles at the Miles Avenue and Washington Street
intersection, and possible loss in property values.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING
CLOSED.
Council Member Sniff asked Staff what the City's requirements were for notification of
property owners.
Mr. Herman advised that the requirement is for notices to be sent to property owners
within 300-foot radius from the perimeter of the proposed project. On this particular
project, notices were also sent to major contacts, whose names were raised during the
compatibility issue. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Herman advised that the City has
no requirement for notification of property owners within 1000 feet of a project but that
the Planning Director may send additional notices, at his discretion.
Council Member Sniff felt it is important that property owners are notified of any project
that might potentially affect their property. He asked Staff if an EIR had been prepared
for this project.
Mr. Herman advised that in 1992, the City adopted an EIR for the General Plan which
sets standards for Miles Avenue and Washington Street. When a proposal is received,
the project is reviewed for consistency with the general plan, thus requiring dedication
improvements. A mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared when a previous proposal
for a 736-unit apartment complex was approved at this site, as well as a 300-lot
subdivision to the east; and that environmental information was utilized to determine if
this proposed project was significantly increasing or decreasing the impacts previously
addressed. Since the RY park is considered seasonal", it was determined that it had less
impact than did the apartment complex. Under CEQA, use of prior environmental
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 27 July 19, 1994
information is allowed to make a determination. In response to CQIIflCiI Member Sniff,
he confirmed that the previously- approved apartment complex is no longer valid.
Council Member Sniff proposed that the case be continued until the September 20, 1994
to give sufficient time to consider all the concerns. He commented on the importance
of this project and felt careful consideration should be given to the increased traffic and
intersection maneuverability, the light proliferation, the visibility of the poles and netting,
and the compatibility with the adjacent property uses.
Council Member McCartney echoed many of Council Member Sniff's concerns and
added he felt it was unfair to compare an apartment complex with the proposed project,
due to the proposed driving range. The additional concerns he expressed were noise and
visual impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, the seven-day-a-week lighting until 10
p.m., and the possibility of declining property values. He believed the issues need to be
closely reviewed, as to whether we want the City to be a neighborhood or an area for
transient population, and suggested the project may be out of sync with the overall nature
of north La Quinta.
Council Member Bangerter concurred that the project should be continued and noted she
shared many, but not all, of the same concerns already mentioned by Council. Her two
main concerns were the traffic issues and the notice requirements, and she suggested that
Council give Staff a clearer indication on notification requirements for the various
projects.
Council Member Perkins stated a project of this nature should have property-owner
notifications sent out to a minimum radius of 1000 feet. If this project should not be
approved, he felt Council needs to put some restrictions on the site before another
proposal is made, to reduce the chances of litigation problems. He stated that traffic is
already on the increase on Washington Street because of the improvements of the bridge
and the intersection at Miles Avenue, and should be a consideration on this project. He
advised that if there is an expected maneuverability problem with the RVs, the
intersection would have to be modified again, at the responsibility of the developer. He
expressed appreciation for the work the developer had done on the proposal He agreed
with continuing the case until the September 20th meeting, sending out meeting
notifications to a greater radius of property owners for that meeting.
Mayor Pena concurred that the meeting be continued, giving sufficient time to reflect
upon the comments submitted by the residents and develop them either into mitigated
possibilities or look at other possibluties.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to continue Conditional Use Permit 94-
012 and 94-013 to the September 20, 1994 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
MIN'LTTE ORDER NO.94-178.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 28 July 19, 1994
BUSINESS SESSION............Continued
9. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING REQUEST FROM LA QUINTA BRONCOS
ALL- STAR BASEBALL TEAM.
Mr. Albert Padilla, 52-105 Avenida Martinez, coach for La Quinta's Broncos All-Star
team, reiterated the request for financial assistance for the team to travel and participate
in the National Championship games in Illinois. In response to Mayor Pena, he stated
if adequate funds are not raised, the team will have to forfeit.
Council Member Bangerter suggested that the legislative contingency fund be utilized to
give some assistance to the team.
MOTION It was moved by Mayor Pena, and seconded by Council Member Bangerter,
that $1,500 be allocated to the team out of the legislative contingency fund, with the
stipulation that the funds be returned, if insufficient funds are collected to make the trip.
Council Member Perkins said he wished the Council could help more, but there are many
worthwhile groups that need funding support.
Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.94-179.
PUBLIC HEARINGS............Continued
2. TENTATIVE TRACT 27952 CONSIDERATION OF A SUBDIVISION TO
CREATE 55 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS PLUS MISCELLANEOUS LOTS ON 22 +
ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO LA
QUINTA DRIVE AND EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET IN RANCHO LA
QUINTA.
Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that the proposed subdivision is for 55 single-
family lots, plus miscellaneous lots for streets and common-pool areas. The Planning
Commission recommended on June 28th that the tentative tract be approved and there
was no opposition to the project at the public hearing.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. There being no one wishin?
to speak the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8 City Council Minutes 29 July 19, 1994
RESOLUTION NO.94-54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 55-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON
APPROXIMATELY 22 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE
OF RANCHO LA QUINTA DRIVE, EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No. 94?54,
subject to conditions. Motion carried unanimously.
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-045 AMENDMENT TO THE MAJOR
ARTERIAL STANDARD TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN TRANSITIONAL
ROADWAY DESIGN.
Mr. Herman, Planning Director, advised that the proposed General Plan Amendment was
drafted, per direction of Council in October 1993, working with the City of Indio and
County of Riverside; to revise City standards to permit transitional design. The language
in the draft allows flexibility in attaining the goals of each of the entities regarding the
six-lane artenals of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. The Planning Comrnission
recommended approval at their meeting on June 28th with no opposition present at the
meeting.
In response to Council Member Bangerter, Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised
there may be a possibility of receiving some ISTEA funding and Bikeway funds.
Council Member Perkins asked Staff what cities had responded to the project.
Mr. Herman advised that direct response was received from the City of Indio, letters
have been received from the City of Indian Wells, CalTrans, and Riverside County.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. There being no one wishing
to speak the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
RESOLUTION NO.94-55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION AND
GRANTING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-045.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/McCartney to adopt Resolution No.94-55, Case
No. GPA 94-045. Motion carried unanimously.
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02
8City Council Minutes 30 July 19, 1994
Council recessed to the Financing Authority.
Council reconvened and recessed to Closed Session to consider a continued item.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respe tfully submitted
SAUNDRA L JUHOLA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
BIB]
01-18-96-U01
03:46:53PM-U01
CCMIN071994-U02