Loading...
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