HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/2/1981 - MINUTES 91 ,
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 2, 1981
A Regular Meeting of the City Council was called to order by
Mayor Doyle, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz-McCallum
Way, on Wednesday, September 2, 1981 , at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Beirich, Field, Ortner,
Rose and Mayor Doyle
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the salute to the Flag.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY : Mayor adjourned the meeting
for the purpose of convening as the Community Redevelopment
Agency; after which, members reconvened as the City Council .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES :
It was moved by Field, seconded by Beirich, and unanimously
carried, that the minutes of July 15, August 4 and August 19,
1981 be approved.
1 . WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION - BOND BIDS & FIN,ANCING
City Manager stated that although the bid exceeds what
was anticipated, even at 121+%Iproforma can be shown
which gives a justifiable basis for awarding the con-
tract and building the plant; and that it represents
the single largest obligation the City has undertaken,
and represents a significant milestone that has taken
many years to come to this point.
Assistant City Manager stated that several proforma
have been provided, and after the bond bid was received
this date, it was updated showing that the bids received
are still not so high that the City cannot afford to fund
the project; that the cash balance of the Sewer Fund
will increase slightly after five years from now; and
recommended that the Council approve the Public Facilities
Corporation awarding sale of the bonds to lowest and only
responsible bidder, establish amount of annual lease
payment to the Corporation, and approve indenture of (127)
mortgage and deed of trust by and between the Corporation
and First Interstate Bank of California.
Ray Fors, Stone & Youngberg, stated that bids were
received and opened in the office of First Interstate
Bank, this date, and that the one and only bid was submitted
by Merrill Lynch White Weld Capital Markets Group and Associates
at a net effective interest rate, including discount but
not counting the cost of insurance, at 12.5526% and if the
cost of the insurance is counted as part of that discount,
the net effective interest rate would be 12.6483%. He
stated the bid is responsive and conforms to the bid docu-
ment; that the amount of the issue and the dismal condition
of the bond market, i .e. , the municipal bond market, account
for only one bid, which represents twenty investors; that
the debt service will require an annual payment of
$2,440,538, commencing upon the completion of the plant
expansion, which would be the maximum payment, noting
that there are payments $130,000 below that amount, and
those monies would be cycled back to the City from the
Corporation.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 2
1 . WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION (Continued)
Mr. Stradling, legal counsel , stated that it is not
automatic that the funds would be recycled, but is
adecision to be made each year by the City, whether
the funds should be left in the construction fund
for improvements or elected as a credit on the, rent
that the City pays.
In response to question by Council , Assistant City
Manager stated that 750 new connections are projected
for 1981-82, and 500 each year thereafter - historically, CONT 'D
City has experienced 1 ,200 connections per year. City (127)
Manager stated that if there were zero hookups or less
than 500, other funding for that period of time would
be necessary; that the first position would be to fall
back on the balance in the Sewer Fund, projected to
stabilize at $4.8 million, which would be sufficient
to cover a lesser number of hookups for several years;
that some of the accumulated reserves from past year
which are not increasing, should not be appropriated
in the event those funds would be necessary to cover
the debt; and that the third alternative would be
to raise sewer service charges, however, he believed
that something like a national economic catastrophe
would trigger such an alternative.
Councilman Beirich stated that considering the reserves
in capacity for mandatory hookups, the plant is at
zero capacity, and not to act would only create future
problems, and regardless of the interest rate, it would
not make sense to set aside everything that has been
done and not proceed.
Councilman Rose stated that it should be re-emphasized
that the mandatory hookup program for 1983-84 must be
done, and the Council probably will face much resistance,
but it has been figured into the projections.
Mayor stated that this has been a long, hard process and
much time and expertise has been given by the financial ,
planning, and economic communities, and he believed it
is the only way to go and any delay would only exacerbate
the situation.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that past, present, and future
Councils have been and will continue to be responsible for
the healthy financial position of the City; and that she
was pleased the project was going to proceed and looked
forward to it moving along rapidly.
Resolution 13948 was presented, entitled:
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ANNUAL LEASE RENTAL
PAYMENT AND APPROVING THE INDENTURE OF MORTGAGE
AND DEED OF TRUST.
It was moved by Field, seconded by Beirich; and unani-
mously carried, that the bond bids be approved, and that
the Public Facilities Corporation be requested to award
the sale thereof to lowest and only responsible bidder.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, that Resolution 13948 be adopted.
�s
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 3
2. CENTRAL. CORRIDOR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - DISESTABLISH-
MENT AND REFUND
Background: On August 5, 1981 , Council declared intent
to disestablish the District, created by Ordinance 1109,
and to refund benefit charge and related costs paid by
various businesses in connection therewith, and set
this as time and place for hearings thereon.
Mayor noted that in view of the Council 's stated intent
to disestablish the district, repetitive testimony in
opposition to the district would be redundant; that the
Council was open to hearing anything new that would bear
on its proposed action; and that representative of
the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Gorney, and Mr. Glen of
Citizens & Merchants Association, have requested an
opportunity to make a few remarks. He asked for a show
of hands of those in the audience in support of disestablishing
the district, to which the better part of the audience
signalled support.
Lloyd Maryanov, Chamber of Commerce, stated that the (133)
Chamber held a public forum in July, at which its
membership and citizens were invited to express their
views concerning the surrey and the assessment district;
that about 50-70 people attended, who indicated general
support for the surrey; the a follow-up questionnaire
was sent to 1 ,000 members of the Chamber, in an effort
to represent the feelings of the membership; and that 238
responses were received; that 171 responded affirmatively
and 67 negatively that some kind of people moving transpor-
tation would enhance the City. He highlighted responses
to other questions, i .e. , 137 said the City should pay a
portion of the cost, and 26 said no: that results were
difficult to tabulate , but most said the City should pay
at least 50% of the cost; and that as to whether the system
was wanted or not wanted, 142 said yes, and 4 said no.
He stated that the questionnaire represents Chamber
membership views and supports a system for next year,
but does not address funding; that he believes the mem-
bership would like to see a system and is willing to share
in the cost; that no one in the community feels the last
year's method of assessment was fair, but if a fair assess-
ment can be worked out, they would be willing to support
it; that the maximum contribution of any one single business
last year was too large, and too much burden should not be
placed on any single business; that general tone of the
response was favoring a system, that community is changing,. and
that commerce in the community is changing. He stated that it
is encumbent on everyone to look for ways to enhance and
insured continued commerce for the community's economic base.
Mayor stated that the purpose of the hearing was to con-
sider disestablishing the district and refunding the
charges, and although he had agreed to remarks by those
representing the three major groups, the Council would
take up the issue whether the community wants a people
mover and all questions attendant thereto at its September
16, 1981 meeting,
25
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 4
2. CENTRAL CORRIDOR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (Continued)
Mr. Gorney presented his report, signed by all members
of his committee, and urged that the Council adopt
both ordinances before it. He stated that the report
deals with vehicles, corridors to served, financing,
and scheduling; and that minority report has been
prepared by members of the committee who take exception
to any assessment of merchants.
Bob Glenn, Palm Springs Merchants & Citizens Association,
read a prepared statement, copy of which is on file
in the Office of the City Clerk, supporting disestablish-
ment of the district, and urging that the Council not
take any action to repeat a similar project, and
expressing view that the majority of the businesses do
not want a separate transportation system.
Nathan Wenniger, 1919 Mark Leslie Drive,; stater.) he wished CONT'D
to speak concerning any future system, but would wait
until the September 16 meeting. (133)
Alec Chotobuk, 477 N. Palm Canyon, requested that the
Council consider refunding costs incurred by those
merchants involved in litigation regarding the district,
which he estimated to be about $200 each, as a good
neighbor policy.
Judy Baldwin, 1919 Mark Leslie Drive, offered to conduct
proposed City survey, on a voluntary basis, and have
the responses ready by the September 16 meeting. She
stated opinion that only two questions are needed, i .e. ,
does the respondent want a vehicle and is he willing
to pay for it.
Mayor inquired if anyone else wished to be heard; there
were no further appearances, and the hearing was closed.
Councilwoman Orther stated that it has taken a 'long
time in arriving at this point; that she believed the
views expressed in the community were done with
sincerity; that she did not think the district was
handled properly in the first place; and that any
consideration in the future for a similar project
would require a great deal of thought. She urged those
who receive a questionnaire to return it.
City Clerk read title of Ordinance, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
DISESTABLISHING THE CENTRAL CORRIDOR BUSINESS IMPROVE-
MENT AREA AND REPEALING CHAPTER 3.98 OF THE PALM
SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, WHICH PROVIDED A SPECIAL LEVY
OF BENEFIT CHARGE TO BE PAID BY BUSINESSES OPERATING
IN SAID AREA.
and title of Ordinance, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
ORDERING THE REFUND OF CHARGES IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE
CENTRAL CORRIDOR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA 'WHICH PRO-
VIDED A SPECIAL LEVY OF BENEFIT CHARGES TO BE PAID
BY BUSINESSES OPERATING IN SAID AREA.
It was moved by Ortner, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, that further readings be waived, and that the
Ordinances be introduced for first reading.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, and unanimously
carried, that Resolution 13949, appropriating $151 ,015 for
refund of charges, be adopted.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 5
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (INDIAN
TRUST LANDS)
Recommendation : That the Council consider multiple
amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element and
Zoning Map for Indian Trust Lands in response to
Tribal Council request concerning approximately 900
acres in various sections of the City.
Councilman Ortner stated that since she and members
of her family own lands within various sections
under consideration, she would abstain from discussion
and voting.
Director of Community Development stated that following (149)
the Secretary of Interior's decision in 1977, contract
was entered into between the City and Tribal Council to
process land use applications on Indian Trust lands;
that request was drawn by the Tribal Council for
General Plan and Zoning amendments in 1978, followed
by joint sessions between the two Councils to discuss
those; that Tribal Council requests were somewhat
modified; and that the Planning Commission reviewed
the requests at two public hearings in July and
August, 1981 .
Planning Director reviewed report of Director of Com-
munity Development, dated September 2, 1981 , which
covers the changes on a section by section basis, and
details the differences between the Planning Commission
recommendations and Tribal Council requests (refer to
Synopsis of Recommendations attached to said Director's
report) .
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that the Commission considered the
Tribal Council 's proposal and alternatives, and with
that knowledge, the Council may make its decision; however,
if it considers something which it knows the Commission
did not consider, then that would have to be returned
to the Commission for recommendation.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
John Adams, Tribal Council Planning Consultant, stated
that various data was reviewed in arriving at the Tribal
Council recommendations, including current Zoning Ordinance,
General Plan, Zoning Map, site inspections, approved and/or
constructed projects, 1967 Master Plan of Flood Control
and Drainage, Sewer Master Plan, General Plan Street Plan,
EIR for Sewer Plant, meetings with City staff, and participa-
tion in study sessions between the Tribal and City Councils.
He stated that Tribal Council 's original request was modi-
fied in that certain parcels were deleted where a non-
conformity would be created or where there would be a
conflict with approved plans; that a minor modification in
the Zoning Text would preclude a non-conforming use in
Section 14; that the proposed amendments are not subject
to CEQA; that concerns were raised with regard to environmental
impacts, and, if during the review process of a project,
mitigation measures should be imposed, then that should
be appropriately considered; that he had no problem with
the matrix showing existing/proposed zoning impacts, and
accepted those as reasonable projections as far as reasonable
service impacts, with the exception that they may be a little
high for sewers ; that he believed the increases in residential
use in Section 14 would have an insignificant impact regarding
drainage; that he was aware of the County's review of the
> 4
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 6
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
drainage master plan and the increased density both in
land use and type of use should be considered; that he
understood the water source would be able to accomodate
the changes, and believed that when streets are fully
improved, including signalization, there would) be adequate
facilities to handle the increased density and uses; that
perhaps the 1976 Master Plan of Sewers should be updated;
that he thought the most significant effect experienced
would be the market place for new homes, and he thought
there was adequate time to take adequate mitigation
measures as may be appropriate if the City continues
an historic growth rate of 933 units per year;, that
information has been solicited from the School District
before a position is taken regarding the School Impact
Fees; and requested that the Council take action on the
Tribal Council 's final request. He stated that there is
a parcel in Section 20 which has been appealed and is
scheduled for joint hearing between the two Councils, CONT'D
but it is a part of the total request. (149)
Barbara Young, Tribal Council Vice-Chairman, stated
she was pleased to see the end of a long-process.
Art Buntz, Tribal Council Attorney, stated that the
impact of the zoning is evidenced by what is riot being
done, i .e. , Tribal Council did not act independently,
did not use Ord. 779 which allows 100-ft highrise buildings,
and in effect has not made any basic change in the makeup
of the City; that changes have been scaled-down from what:
was originally requested in 1978, and the onl), basic
change is a significant increase in the amount: of land
for industrial use, otherwise the basic character of
the community remains the same; and that the changes
are viewed as ameliorating a wrong, and the City Council
should not expect any more large scale changes by the
Tribal Council, but may receive some on ,an owner-by-owner
basis.
Rod Hanway, associated with Tribal Council Planning
Consultant, generally made the following statments :
a) Changes correct an inequity and provide opportunity
to study various areas and neighborhoods involved to
see if it would be better for a zone other than
1973 or existing zoning.
b) Requests do not relate to all lands rezoned in 1973 or
included in 1978 request.
c) Sections 2, 14 and 22 deal with residential neighborhoods,
the character of which is not proposed to be changed,
with some modification in the density.
d) Other changes relate to the north and sough ends of the
Airport runway to clarify industrial use of those areas,
which would encourage the industrial and economic base
of the community.
e) M-1 would reduce conflict and specific uses would be
greatly clarified.
f) Residential increases will result in a more compact
city and reduce sprawl and lessen the need for expanding
services .
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 7
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
g) Regarding Sections 12, 18 and 20, he believed there was
no disagreement that the ultimate use is intended to be
industrial , basic difference being timing, phasing and
tools to be used to enforce various architectural,
environmental and development standards.
h) City position has been that M-1-P is the one and only
available tool to the City to provide aesthetic and
development characteristics for development or the
industrial portion of the City; Tribal Council believes
M-1 is proper.
i ) M-1-P requires a conditional use permit for certain selected
groups of land uses, but the bottom line is that land uses
are the same; specific differences are in setbacks, land-
scaping, and where parking is permitted; both zones require
architectural approval and the City can use that very
valid and effective tool to enforce development standards.
j) Additional tool is the specific plan, rather than using
zoning as a tool to enforce development standards, a
specific plan is developed for specific streets which CONT'D
identify setbacks, landscaping, signing, ad infinitum (149)
as worked out by the staff and Tribal Council , and it
is believed that would provide a more valid, flexible
and useful tool for enforcing zoning along those corridors
which go through the industrial areas.
k) Specific plan would allow M-1 on interior portions and
a diversity of uses and development standards.
1 ) There is no difficulty in the basic concept of how the
zoning impact matrix was arrived at, except perhaps
sewers which is not significant to raise serious
arguments, and the conclusion is that the City can handle
the changes; thatsewers were looked at in terms of the
collection system, and there may be isolated instances
where existing lines may not be sufficient and parallel lines
,needdd;EIR for the treatment plant indicated historic
growth pattern of 933 units per year, and the proposed
changes will not effect that, there may be ,•impa(,ts, but
those will come from other parts of the City.
Although various changes were reviewed by Planning Director,
Mr. Hanway commented on the various sections, generally, as
follows:
Section 2. A. proposal is to revert to 1973 zoning; B. was
R-G-A, proposal is for R-2 adjacent to shopping
center.
Section 14. Except for two parcels, proposal is to revert to
1973 zoning; the two relate to C-1 and R-2, others
to R-4. Believe this reinforces core of the City
and will not cause any serious difficulties for
the City. The issue of transition between existing
zoning and R-4 can be handled through architectural
review process and agreements with developers; do
not believe an unreasonable violation of sight
differences would occur as result of zoning; Planning
Commission indicated it would consider CDN for the
parcel proposed as C-1 , and since it does not meet
minimum size for CON, development with adjacent
property virtually would be required - property is
not owned by same person, and believe the area has
changed and that should be considered and C-1 affirmed.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 8
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
Section 22. A. is reversion to 1973 zoning. Building
height restriction in R-2 and R-3 are the
same; R-3 otherwise more restrictive.
B. Topography and surrounding uses dictate
that R-1 is not proper use ; believe mobile-
home park use has been in existence a long
time and there is a strong market demand for
R-3 type uses in that area; rezoning to R-3
is logical way of following that trend.
Section 12 Prior to 1973, were residential areas; agree
and 18. with City staff should not be residential .
Section 20. Planning Commission thought that M-1-P may be
too strong and endorsed General Plan amendment to
industrial , but wanted specific p"Ian; believe
tool exists in the M-1 and would offer assistance
in developing any specific plans for that area.
Zoning Text.During negotiation process, C-1-AA deleted from
request; plan to work out differences in text,
proposing minor modification amendment to CONT'D
alleviate condition of non-conformity regarding (1149)
R-4 which exists only in Section 114, except
Desert Hospital ; happy to work with City to
develop new industrial zone or standard that
is mutually acceptable, in the meantime, believe
M-1 best tool to use; Ordinance 779 remains in
effect - not proposing to change any development
standards in that, although Tribal Council has
previously indicated in writing to the City that
it will hold the density in the R-4 to 30 units per
acre rather than the 60 units per acre provided in
Ordinance 779.
He stated that he believes the proposals are workable and
should be acted on in an affirmative manner by the City Council .
Allen Perrier, 225 S. Civic Drive, stated that; he represented
lessee of a 25-acre parcel in Section 18, who is ready to
proceed with development, and requested the M--1 zoning be
approved; and that regarding Mr. Ellis ' interest in Section
20, an appeal is currently pending before the Tribal Council
for M-1 zoning, and to require a specific plan for the
entire area is not realistic before any parcel can be
developed.
There were no further appearances, and the hearing was
closed.
In answer to questions by Council , Tribal Council Planning
Consultant, stated that expressions were made at study
sessions, Planning Commission meetings, and in discussions
with City Staff that they are agreeable to working with
the City in reviewing the M-1 and M-1-P standards; that
he was not suggesting that architectural appeals would
be discouraged if applicant 's did not like the decisions,
but that the same process would be followed, i .e. ,
Architectural Advisory Committee, Planning Commission,
and City Council approvals; and that there is a need to
review the M-1 standards and upgrade those standards
and address the impact on adjacent residential areas
and major thoroughfares.
�Ff
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 9
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
Director of Community Development reviewed the proposed
changes and differences between Commission recommendations
and Tribal Council requests for each section, during which
views were expressed, as follows:
Section 2. Consensus, agree with Planning Commission recom-
mendation.
Section 12. Councilman Field expressed agreement with
recommendations regarding A, B, C, and D,
with the deletion of "0" designation from
B. Concurred in by Councilman Beirich.
Councilman Rose agreed that M-I-P was not
a cure-all , but that the M-1 is also not
a cure-all , and if the the staffs of the
two Councils can come up with a combination
designation, he would not be opposed, but
he preferred the M-1-P.
Mayor stated he agreed with the M-1-P, with
advice to the Planning Commission that 'the
standards should be reviewed to see if there
is something more palatable.
Section 14. Director of Community Development reported
that regarding Block 5, property is vacant, CONT 'D
plans have been submitted and app-oved for (149)
a single-story development, but permits have
not been issued; and that the Commission did
not recommend any R-4 because properties were
already developed or adjacent to single-family.
He stated he agreed that the C-1 parcel would
not meet CON standards in terms of size; that
it has a narrow frontage and a greater depth,
and without access through the existing shopping
center, a long-narrow project would be created
which would generate traffic exiting and egressing
via one or two driveways 300 ft. west of a major
intersection in the City, which he felt would be
poor planning.
Tribal Council Planning Consultant stated that
it would be nice if the property could be
integrated with the property to the east, but
there are many unknowns and integration -is a
remote possibility; that the parcel is small
but opportunity should be given to present
a proposal ; and that he felt it could
be workable with turning movement restrictions.
Concensus of Council : agreement with Planning
Commission recommendation for entire Section.
Section 22. A. Consensus of Council : agreement with
Tribal Council recommendation for R-3.
B. Consensus of Council : agreement with
Commission recommendation for W-R-1-A.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 10
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
Section 22. C. Director of Community Development stated that
the Commission's recommendation was to follow
the channelline; that an application is pending
on the southerly R-3 portion and, if approved,
a POD designation would be shown on the map
and the R-3 deleted; that the existing mobile-
home park is fairly new, and if the zoning
were changed, by Zoning Ordinance definition,
mobilehomes on that land would be illegal ;
that the two zones cannot be equaled; that
changing the zone would place the City in the
position of not allowing any alterations or
additions to the park, which would be a great
inequity; and that if the mobile-home park
were removed, it would then be appropriate
to consider a recommendation for a change
of zone.
Associate of Tribal Council Planning Consultant
stated that they do not have a mitigation
measure for fact stated by Director of Com-
munity Development; that he believed the
change would place the park in a "legal non-
conforming status, which would start the CONT'D
abatement period; and that the existing (14.9)
lease period has 40 years to run.
Director of Community Development stated that
the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that mobile-
homes are not allowed except in areas zoned
for that purpose; that the appropriate time
to consider a change would be if a development
plan were presented proposing a change of use;
and that he was not of the opinion that the
area is in transition.
Consensus of Council : agreement that area may
be in transition, but development plan should
come first, otherwise area should remain RTP.
Section 18. Councilman Beirich stated that he did not
agree with the Planning Commission, not so
much because of location of Ramon Road, but
because of the difficulty of dealing with
any development adjacent to the Airport; that
he agreed with M-1 , with an 0 buffer, and a
reliance on statements by Tribal Council Planning
Consultant to work to strengthen the M-1 ,
M-1-P standards.
Councilmembers Field and Rose agreed with the
M-1-P recommendation.
Mayor agreed with Councilman Beirich, and stated
that if the M-1 is modified, it would be
acceptable.
City Attorney stated that a tie vote would
mean no action; and if there is a deadlock,
the matter could be referred to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration.
Consensus : Act on other items, and consider
this separately.
�J
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 11
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
Section 20. Director of Community Development stated that
the Tribal Council Planning Consultant is
in agreement with the specific plan concept,
but wants the M-1 change first; that he felt
the plan should be developed first, possibly
working out areas of agreement and how the
streets should be treated, and once that
conclusion arrived at, then changing the zoning
on the property.
Tribal Council Planning Consultant stated that
it has been pointed out that the west side, of
Bogie Road is partially developed and entirely
zoned M-1 ; that the property has frontage on
Ramon Road, a heavily travelled thoroughfare
with M-1 tvpe developments along it; that they
have recognized concerns, in particular, for CONT'D
Crossley Road and the residential area to the (149)
south and have provided a buffer and a pleasing
thoroughfare; that the property is severely impacted
by the Airport, wind, and blowsand and M-1 is the
most appropriate zoning; that they are receptive
to working with the City staff to see if' something
more mutually acceptable can be developed; and
that he would not have any problem if the matter
came back to the Planning Commission at its
second meeting in September.
Following discussion, it was moved by Field, seconded by
Beirich, and unanimously carried, Ortner abstaining, that
recommendations regarding Section 18 be referred back to
the Planning Commission for reconsideration.
It was moved by Field, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, Ortner abstaining, that recommendation concerning
Section 20 be referred to the Planning Commission for
reconsideration.
Resolution 13950, was presented, entitled:
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
ELEMENT BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION, FOR
CERTAIN PARCELS OF INDIAN TRUST LAND AS DESCRIBED
HEREIN IN SECTION 2, 12, 14•, AND 22, T4S, W.
and City Clerk read title of Ordinance, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP BY
REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTIES OF INDIAN TRUST
LAND IN SECTIONS 2, 12, 14 AND 22, 174S, W.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, Ortner abstaining, that Resolution 13950 be
adopted; that further reading of the Ordinance be waived;
and that the Ordinance be introduced for first reading.
Following the remaining scheduled public hearings, Mayor
reported that the Tribal Council caucused and requested
that the Council reconsider its action concerning Sections
18 and 20.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, and unanimously
carried, Ortner abstaining, to reconsider the General Plan
and Zoning Map amendments.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 12
3. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Continued)
In answer to question by Council , regarding effect of
a tie vote relative to Section 18, City Attorney stated
that in the absence of referring the matter to the
Planning Commission, the Council could table the matter
and bring it up at a later date, otherwise the present
zoning would stand.
In answer to question by Council , Tribal Council Attorney
stated that lack of action by the Council would be taken
by the Tribal Council as the City Council 's final action
and say in the matter.
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that everything west of Vella Road
is in residential designation.
Motion by Beirich, seconded by Doyle, to reconsider motion CONT'D
referring Section 18 to Planning Commission, Failed to (1[E9)
carry by the following vote :
AYES: Beirich & Doyle
NOES: Field & Rose
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Ortner
Councilman Rose stated that he prefers sending the
matter to the Planning Commission because of the amount
of time that has been spent in considering the changes,
and if the Commission can find a better way, then it
is consistent with efforts by the Council in trying to
be fair to everyone, including the Tribe members; and
not 'just to hurry the action to get the appeal process
started.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, Ortner abstaining, to reconsider motion referring
Section 20 to the Planning Commission.
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that the Tribal Council recommendation
included proposal for a 20-ft O-zone buffer between the
M-1 and residential designation.
In answer to question by Council , City Attorney stated
that the Council could consider an expanded 0••zone designation
without referring the matter back to the Commission, since
the same land uses are being discussed and it is only a
question of minor modifications of boundaries.
Councilman Beirich stated that he could support the M-1 ,
with an expanded O-zone buffer of 75 ft, recognizing the
offer to address the M-1 , M-1-P standards.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and carried, Ortner
abstaining and Field voting No, that the action to refer Section
20 the Planning Commission be rescinded, and that an M-1 designation,
with a 75-ft buffer be approved.
City Clerk read title of proposed Ordinance, incorporating Section 20;
after which, it was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, and unanimously
carried, that further reading be waived; and so moved and seconded,
Ortner abstaining and Field voting No, that the Ordinance, as amended,
be introduced for first reading.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, and! unanimously carried,
Ortner abstaining and Field voting No, that Resolution 13950 be
amended to reflect above designation for Section 20.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 13
4. GENERAL PLAN STREET PLAN AMENDMENT - ANDREAS ROAD
Mayor stated he would abstain from discussion and voting,
and turned the meeting over to the Mayor pro tem.
Recommendation of Planning Commission : That the Council
amend the General Plan Street Plan to delete Andreas Road
as a secondary thoroughfare between North Palm Canyon Drive
and Belardo Road.
Director of Community Development stated that the issue
relates to designation of the street on the General Plan
Street Plan, and not to any consideration of a vacating
the street; that it is not appropriate to maintain the
street on the General Plan as 2-lanes in both directions,
mainly because of the jog to the west it takes after crossing
Palm Canyon Drive; that elimination of the street as a
secondary thoroughfare would result in a local street
designation, which would not be carried on the General Plan
Street Plan ; and that the Commission ordered a negative
declaration and recommended the above described amendment.
Mayor pro tem declared the hearing open.
Morgan Dougherty, 225 S. Civic Drive, attorney representing
the Zadie Bunker Trust and Earl Strebe, stated there would
be no opposition from a secondary thoroughfare to a collector (101 )
street designation, but they would oppose a local street
designation; that they view the change as part of a process
of vacating the street, and have not heard any specific
reasons why a specific public benefit will occur by
changing the designation; that there would be safety
problems in terms of people exiting from the theatre
that would arise out of closing the street; that he
could see only substantial detriment to closing
the street, and only an issue of private benefit, and
a question of whether the City would be making a public
gift to the Desert Inn Fashion Plaza; that the Planning
Commission has indicated that there would not be any
vacation unless a specific plan is brought forth; and
that he questioned why the issue is before the Council
if the question is not vacating the street. He stated
opinion that if concerns regarding street vacation are
not expressed at this time, it will be said later that
the issue was raised and discussed.
In answer to questions by Council , Director of Community Develop-
ment stated that in order for a street vacation to
proceed, the Council would have to first declare its
intent to do so, and then set a public hearing thereon;
that review of the street plan is an on-going process,
and circumstances developed at certain times which
cause closer scrutiny at certain portions of the plan ;
that the deletion is not recommended because the street
is substandard, since if there were a need for it, con-
demnation proceedings could be commenced; that a secondary
thoroughfare is not justified both in terms of traffic and
functioning as a 4-lane roadway, particularly with the
offset configuration, and if it were to remain a secondary
thoroughfare, it would be tantamount to intent to widen
it to 88-ft; and that a local street is a 50 ft right-of-
way and a collector street is 60-66 ft. right-of-way.
�3
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 14
4. GENERAL PLAN STREET PLAN AMENDMENT (Continued)
Tom Marshall , 64600 Old Prospector Trail , Palm Desert,
real estate appraiser, stated that a commercial
property on a corner is more valuable than one not
on a corner, and that he wished to be on record that
this is a potential problem which should be nipped
at the outset.
Ray Gorney, 201 North Palm Canyon, stated that this matter
came to light when the Downtown Development Advisory Com-
mission met and presented the matter to the Planning Com-
mission because of a proposed move by Saks Fifth Avenue in
that area ; that if it had not been raised by 1the DDAC, it
would not be before the Council ; that the value of his
business has been hurt; that in a recent news release,
the Redevelopment Director was reported as stating that
a contract has been signed by Snks and the Desert Inn
Fashion Plaza for a store to be erected on that site;
that he did not see such a reference in the Planning
Commission report, although one commissioner stated that
if it were not for the proposed move by Saks, the matter
would not have come about; that he did not believe the
action of the Commission would enable him to dispose of D'
his business at the present time; and that he did not COMT ONT
see why this action should be taken until the project
is imminent, proposed or in the works. He urged the
Council to postpone action until. a specific plan is
presented for that area and it is willing to address the
perplexities that the matter would involve.
Gary Chandler, 3750 Calle de Ricardo, representing
Metropolitan Theatres, stated that he recognized the
issue was not street vacation, but that he has the
same feelings and concerns expressed by other speakers.
There being no further appearances, Mayor pro tem
declared the hearing closed.
In answer to questions by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that the Traffic Engineer's recommenda-
tion was based on his assessment of the street and its
present use; that use of the street, ability to use it,
and howintensely it would be used are all part; of the
mix in considering that assessment; that a street can
be vacated in a number of ways., but a General Plan
amendment would still be involved; that amending the
General Plan at this time would facilitate a street
vacation; and that the street would not be vacated
unless its use, ability and how it figured into the plan
were first considered,
Councilman Rose stated that if events continue, to progress,
the issue of street vacation may be before the! Council in
order to allow Saks to stay in the City; and although street
vacation is not being heard at this time, there should be
a mental recognition that it is a possibility and there
should not be any attempt to infer that no one has ever
heard about it before.
Council Minutes
E
9-2-81 Page 15
4. GENERAL PLAN STREET PLAN AMENDMENT (Continued)
Director of Community Development stated that there is
no question that the matter is before the Council because
of consideration of the possible status of the street and
the focus of whether the street is needed; that it is
designated as a secondary thoroughfare on the General
Plan and whether it ever is considered for vacation, the
issue is still whether it is justified as a secondary
thoroughfare, given its present location, and how it is being
used, and the conclusion was that it is not justified to
beign the General Plan as a secondary thoroughfare because
it will never function in that capacity; that a secondary
thoroughfare is approximately the same as a major thoroughfare -
2 lanes in both direction and proposed to carry great volumes of
trafftc; and that configuration of Andreas Road would not
allow that to happen, complicated by the fact that Palm
Canyon Drive is a one-way street in that area.;
Mayor pro tem stated that the proposed resolution addresses
the matter of street vacation.
CONT'D
City Manager stated that that Saks indicated that it had (101 )
two choices, which were taken at face value; one was to
stay in Palm Springs, i .e. , adjacent to the Desert Inn
Fashion Plaza, or to move to Palm Desert; that staff, in
order to not lose the opportunity to continue to have
this important facility in the City, did, to the extent
possible and within the limits of the law, attempt to
facilitate the planning process and timing as to whether
it would be possible to relocate the operation in Palm
Springs, and, to that end, recognized at the onset the
limitations as to the number of times per year that the
General Plan can be amended, and to utilize that opportunity
so that there would not be the risk of a three month loss
if everything came together quickly; that a secondary
thoroughfare is improper and a conclusion easily reached
when considering the status of traffic in the downtown area;
that there is no question that the Saks issue made that
conclusion apparent; that the issue is not considering
vacation, but a timing factor, and is not a substitution
to looking at all the issues which must be addressed if
a vacation were to occur; that if vacation were to occur,
it would only be after a specific plan is approved; that
ownership of the property on both sides would have to
be resolved, and concerns are valid in that regard; and
that efforts, to date, have been to facilitate public,
Planning Commission, and Council discussion, step-by-step
within the law, in order for Saksto remain in the City.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that people are concerned with
what will be the end result, which is vacating the street;
and that she felt the Council should have a project before
it, before taking action. She also stated that there was
a possibility for some type of joint venture, which would
not necessitate a single-ownership on both sides of the
street:.
Councilman Beirich stated that he was not prepared to
take action, and would like additional information regarding
justification of designation as a local street as opposed
to a collector street.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously
carried, Doyle abstaining, that this matter be continued to
September 16, 1981 , pending receipt of additional information
from staff regarding local/collector street designations.
26 1
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 16
5. STREET VACATION - EL PLACER ROAD
Background: On July 22, 1981 , Council declared intent
to vacate a portion of E1 Placer Road, along the west (145)
half, between Ramon Road and Sunny Dunes Road, and set
this as time and place for hearing. Reasons for the
vacation were reviewed by Director of Community Develop-
ment, as outlined in his report of July 22, 1981 .
Mayor declared the hearing open; there being no appear-
ances, the hearing was closed.
Resolution 13951 , ordering the vacation, as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Ortner,
seconded by Beirich, and unanimously carried, that
Resolution 13951 be adopted.
6. STREET VACATION - TAHQUITZ DRIVE
Background: On August 5, 1981 , Council declared intent to
vacate portion of Tahquitz Drive north of Arenas Road, to
be included in the boundary of Tract 17151 , and set this
as time and place for hearing. (145)
Mayor declared the hearing open.
John Jamison, Cadillac-Fdirview Homes, 18 Corporate
Drive, Newport Beach, spoke in favor of the vacation,
stating it is necessary for the completion of the
project.
There being no further appearances, the hearing was
closed.
Resolution 13952 ordering the vacation, as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Beirich,
seconded by Ortner, and unanimously carried, that
Resolution 13952 be adopted.
7. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT - LAND ACQUISITION RE EXPANSION
Recommendation: , That the Council determine that the public
interest and necessity require the acquisition of certain
real property for the expansion of the Wastewater Treat- (127)
ment Plant to provide an area for percolation ponds.
Director of Community Development stated that negotiations
are currently in process to purchase the two parcels; that
if negotiations are not successful , the proposed action
would enable condemnation proceedings to be commenced.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Tom Russell , attorney on behalf of Lawrence Bow, 750
Rancho Circle, Fullerton, expressed concern as to the
impact on the property and the personal interest of
its owner, the impact on outlying Indian land in the
area, and the possibility that the City will forego
an alternative project which has been proposed which
could be a more successful project for the Citty in
the long run, and requested that the Council refrain
from a decision until consideration is given to the
alternative proposal . He stated that Mr. Bows objection
is that the property is income-producing, and if condemned,
it would remove that asset from the Indian community; that
one advantage possessed by Mr. Bow is that condemnation
does not take into account the tax exempt status of the
American Indian, and in view of the projected income that
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 17
7. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT - LAND ACQUISITION (Continued)
Mr. Bow would receive from the property, he would raise
serious questions as to the compensation available to
a person in his status over the long term, basically,
considering this loss - not the ordinary loss situation;
that the portion of the parcel not to be acquired will
suffer severance damages and rendered less valuable
considering the adjacent sewer plant usage; that severance
impact was considered for the Kapp parcel ; that appraisals
are almost equal on the two properties; that the Yeshi-Lyn
report refers to alternative water reclamation procedures
including golf course watering, and a small difference
between the cost of percolation ponds and reclamation;
that the big difference is in the revenue which could
be generated from reclamation, i .e. , projected between
$900,000 and $1 .9 million per year by 1993; that the
Montgomery report indicates the future of Palm Springs
includes reclamation, although the question is when
that would happen; that he suggested requesting Yeshi-Lyn
to comment on its specific questions before moving ahead;and
that he recognized Motgomery reviewed the report but
did not contact Yeshi-Lyn to address the questions it
raised in the document it presented to the City. CONT'D
(127)
Frank Bogert, 2710 Plaimor, stated that in considering
development of a golf course on the subject property,
DWA indicated that it could not guarantee providing
water for the course, and now it is being said that it
is necessary to hold the effluent; that he understood
the City has obtained the Kapp property; that use of
the Bow property will require cutting and removing approxi-
mately 1 million cu. yds of dirt; that a 15-ft Fenced
hole on Crossley/Golf Club Drive is not aesthetically
pleasing, and M-1-P would be a better use; and that the same
end result could be accomplished with the remaining 20
acres of the Kapp parcel . He read in full a letter
from Charles Klinenberg, Secretary, Association of the
Desert Condominiums, a copy of which is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk, opposing the use of the property
for sewage purposes.
Paul Miller, representing Pritchard Plaza, 63 Wilshire Blvd,
Los Angeles, lessee of the Bow parcel , stated that appeal
is to be heard in joint session with the Tribal Council
and City Council on September 8, 1981 , and urged a postponement
until that is completed.
There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed.
City Manager stated that the long-range plans for the treatment
plant have always been for one major facility; that the recom-
mendation will result in acquiring land for ultimate expansion
and avoiding higher costs at a later date to acquire developed
property; that the proposed action does not relate to setting
price, but establishes need - recognizing that if need is
established at the earliest possible date, taxpayer dollars
may be saved; that the Yeshi-Lyn report had been reviewed by
staff and Montgomery and may be feasible, but to count on it
as a viable solution may not be a fair assumption.
2 G G Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 18
7. WATEWATER TREATMENT PLANT - LAND ACQUISITION (Continued)
General Operations Director stated that the Yeshi-Lyn
report indicated that not as much land would be needed,
however, added back-up would still be required; that
water reclamation is the responsibility of DWA., and
it was his understanding that DWA determined it was
not financially feasible; that Montgomery looked at
the report and responded to it; that the Yeshi-Lyn
report contained loosely defined findings and data;
and that a buffer is proposed along Crossley Road to
preclude any future problems.
City Manager stated that comments regarding severance CONT'D
damages would be a determination made by the Court. (127)
General Operations Director stated that the effluent
belongs to DWA, except any used by the City; that it
may contain some nitrate levels; and that there would
have to be some grading on the properties, but that
was taken into consideration when the engineers
looked at the site and determined the potential for
gravity flow. He stated an EIR was done for the
project.
Councilman Beirich stated that this is an integral
part of the $18 million project, and it would not
be sensible to not follow through; and that when
the proposed development was presented, it was made
clear that the Council was considering the expansion
of the treatment plant and, therefore, it should not
be new to the developer or land owner.
Resolution 13953 was presented, entitled:
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC
INTEREST, CONVENIENCE, AND NECESSITY FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN FEE
FOR PUBLIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT PURPOSES.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unani-
mously carried, that Resolution 13953 be adopted.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 19
8. DESERT ASSOCIATES(SHERATON PLAZA - VARIANCE
Background: Appeal by Councilmember to consider Planning
Commission recommendation to grant variance from open space
and parking requirements to allow construction of banquet
game and storage room to existing hotel complex on Calle (146)
Encilia at Tahquitz-McCallum Way.
Director of Community Development reviewed his report,
dated September 2, 1981 .
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Ban Johnson, attorney representing applicant, requested
that this matter be continued to the next meeting, in order
to permit applicant's case to be presented.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, that hearing be continued to September 16, 1981 .
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
a) Female resident (name inaudible) 18100 Cosy Lane
Desert Hot Springs, spoke in support of School (114)
Impact Fees, urging that the Council pass a developer
fee.
b) George Ritter, 73899 Highway 111 , Palm Desert, architect
for Unity Church, requested that final development. plans (116)
for P.D. 108 be approved without condition for turf
parking, since it will not hold up for parking usage,
is difficult to maintain, requires watering, is damaged
by vehicle imprint when wet, and is not conducive to
walking on when wet. He requested they be allowed to
install a conventional parking lot, which meets City
standards.
c) Rev. Ransford, Unity Church, concurred with comments (116)
by Mr. Ritter.
d) Robert Fey, 1580 S. Palm Canyon, stated that he did not
think the school impact fee study was properly approached; (114)
that impact on enrollment is school-by-school and not
district wide; and stated that the School District has
received State funds based on a declining enrollment.
e) Pat Larsen, School District Board Member, stated that
the District has no way of raisingnoney to build what (114)
is long overdue in Desert Hot Springs ; that Vista del
Monte is experiencing overcrowding and a change has
been made in its boundaries ; and that CEQA mitigation
measure can be used only for construction and not for
programs.
f) Evelyn Campbell , 66347 3rd Street, Desert Hot Springs,
stated that she works and spends her money in Palm (114)
Springs and considers herself a part of the Palm
Springs community; and that the impact fee will allow
other District monies to be used for programs.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 20
LEGISLATIVE ACTION :
9. UNITY IN THE DESERT CHURCH - P.D. 108
Recommendation by Planning Commission : That the Council
approve final development plans for church parking lot (116)
subject to conditions.
Director of Community Development stated that the
applicant was not aware of the turf-block parking
condition, and recommended that this matter be returned
to -the Commission in order that it might consider the
points raised in letter from the applicant why the
turf is not desirable.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Field, and unanimously
carried, that this matter be returned to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration of condition regarding
turf-block parking.
10. RAMON ROAD BRIDGEJTAHQUITZ PROJECT
Recommendation: That the Council approve agreement with
the County of Riverside and the Riverside County Flood
Control District, relative to funding for Ramon Road bridge ( 88 &
and Tahquitz projects. 136)
City Manager stated that the two agreements were reviewed
in detail at the last study session, and concerns were
raised as to the possibility that the City miclht lose
some money that it otherwise would have received in
interest on the $600,000; that it is a risk which
should be acknowledged; but one which he believed to
be worth assuming; that following the study session,
Staff contacted the County and the Flood Control District
and made every effort to work out language that would
be agreeable to the County and District that would take
into account the concerns of the City Council ; and that
there was no success in reaching agreement with the
County to address the problem, and, if the Council
desired to pursue it, language was available, however,
he recommended that the Council approve the agreements
as presented. He also reported the following:
a) The agreement attempts to deal with three possible
circumstances that could occur with the Tahquitz
Project, and to deal with the consequences of
fronting $600,000 of the Ramon Road Bridge project.
b) Those consequences are: 1 ) if the project proceeds
and everything is built at one time; 2) if the
project goes ahead, but certain items from the
Tahquitz project have to be deferred; and 3) if
there is no project which, basically, would occur
because of the mitigation measures relating to
archaeological concerns which the Tribal Council
or other entities found inappropriate.
c) In the latter two instances, terms of the agreement
would protect the City to the extent that -the
District would have to pay for specific improvements
now valued to be approximately $600,000, and it is
assumed that if there were a rise in those costs,
the District would be willing to pay them.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 21
10. RAMON ROAD BRIDGEJTAHQUITZ PROJECT (Continued)
d) The only event in which the City, potentially, would
not recover the $600,000 would be if the Tahquitz
project were delayed for several years and, thus,
place the City in a situation that the $600,000
would not cover the same amount in terms of the
total project, as it does now, which is the issue
for which attempt was made to secure agreement
from the County to allow adjustment of that
amount for that amount of time.
e) Although there is a risk, he believed it was
possibily unlikely.
f) The $600,000 will be the last amount to be spent
on the Ramon Road Bridge project, and is not
expected to be drawn upon for at least one year. CONT'D
(88 &
g) The Tahquitz project is moving close to the point where 136)
it will either be a go or no-go situation, and very
shortly should fall in place in terms of the approvals
of the mitigation measures, and is essentially ready
to go to bid thereafter.
h) If the Tribal Council and others vote favorably, it
should be under construction in a year; if action
is. to the contrary, and there is a problem, that
will be known immediately and there will not be
any project. He did not believe it would be
delayed for several years.
i) Based on estimates and firm bid figure, the Ramon
Road Bridge project would be approximately $500,000
less than what the City had expected to pay and
what was budgeted for the project, although any
delay on that project could eat up that amount if
new bids were called for.
Minute Orders 2977, approving agreement with the
County Flood Control District; and Minute Order 2978
approving agreement with the County, were presented;
after which, it was moved by Beirich, seconded by
Ortner, and unanimously carried, that Minute Orders
2977 and 2978 be adopted.
�• � M1P
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 22
11 . VOLUNTARY RESALE INSPECTION PROGRAM
Recommendation: That the Council endorse a voluntary
resale inspection program. Matter reviewed in detail (112)
at the last study session.
Resolution 13954, establishing the program, was pre-
sented; after which, it was moved by Field, seconded
by Beirich, and carried by the Following vote, that
Resolution 13954 be adopted:
AYES_: Beirich, Field, Rose & Doyle
NO: Ortner
ABSENT: None
12. COMPREHENSIVE FEE SCHEDULE AMENDMENT - SERVICE FEES
Recommendation : That the Council amend the Comprehensive
Fee Schedule to amend the building permit issuance fee, (11,4)
and establish microfilm fees for Planning Division
applications, and for residential resale inspection
and report.
Resolution 13955, amending the fee schedule as
recommended, was presented.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she was only opposed
to the fee relating to the residential resale inspection
and report, since she was not in favor of the program.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and
carried by the following vote, that Resolution 13955 be
adopted:
AYES : Beirich, Field, , Rose & Doyle .
NO: Ortner
ABSENT: None
13. SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEES
Recommendation: That the Council approve the concept of
school impact mitigation and order the preparation of an
environmental assessment to determine impact of construction (114)
on the school district.
City Manager reported receipt of letter from the Tribal
Council , indicating that it has not taken a position on
this issue, and raising a number of questions which it
believes must be answered before a decision is made.. He
stated that the recommendation was so framed because of
the number of issues which should be more quantified
whether it is appropriate to levy the fee; that: staff
believes the fee will be necessary and the environmental
assessment should validate that in a number of respects;
that having the environmental assessment prior to
establishing the fee places the City in the best position
of collecting it; and that the School District will have
some indication whether the City is inclined to move in
that direction. He noted that the potential fee is less
than that which the School District had initially projected.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she was not sure whether
she could support the concept; that she understood that
the fee was not being imposed at this time; and that she
was not convinced that people in Palm Springs should pay
for schools in Desert Hot Springs, and had not yet resolved
that issue in her own mind.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 23
13. SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEES (Continued)
Councilman Rose stated that it should be noted that CONT'D
the concept envisions that all other jurisdictions (114)
within the district would also establish a like fee,
and that that should be added to the resolution.
Mayor stated that he had no objection to the recom-
mendation; and that the -imposition of a fee should
not be a burden only on Palm Springs.
Resolution 13956, approving the concept and ordering
the environmental assessment, was presented; after
which, it was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and
carried by the following vote, that Resolution 13956
be adopted, subject to additional subsection to stipulate
that imposition of a fee shall be subject to all other
involved jurisdictions taking like action:
AYES: Field, Rose & Doyle
NO: Ortner
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN : Beirich
14. HOMEOWNERS EVENING - BUILDING DIVISION
Recommendation : That the Council endorse pilot program
within the Building Division for homeowners to discuss
concerns with personnel re: permits, additions and (112)
problems.
Resolution 13957, endorsing the program, as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Field, seconded
by Beirich, and unanimously carried, that Resolution 13957
be adopted.
15. LAND ACQUISITION - EQUESTRIAN FACILITY
Recommendation : That the Council authorize an acquisition
and exchange of land necessary for the municipal equestrian
facility. Ten acres to be acquired adjacent to and west (109 )
of the Earl Neel property, for a sum,of$300,000; southerly
five acres plus adjacent five acres of existing city-owned
land to be exchanged for the Neel property, plus $14,560
for relocationof nursery growing facilities, upon cipproval
of conditional use permit for the new site.
Resolution 13958 approving the acquisition and exchange,
as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved
by Field, seconded by Rose, and unanimously carries;, Beirich
abstaining, that Resolution 13958 be adopted.
16. MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS (Ordinance introduced 8-5-81 )
City Clerk read title of Ordinance 1147, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY (85)
OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING. A HOME
MORTGAGE FINANCE PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING CITY
OFFICERS TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM.
It was moved by Field, seconded by Beirich, and unanimously
carried, that further reading be waived, and that Ordinance
1147 be adopted.
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 24
CONSENT AGENDA:
17. Minute Order 2979 approving reimbursement to Goldrich, Kest
and Stern for off-site improvements for Senior Citizens Apart- (85
ments in amount of $221,643 utilizing 1976-77 Community Devel-
opment Block Grant Funds.
18. Resolutions 13959 13960 13961 13962 and
13963 approving Claims & Demands and Payroll Warrants. (86
19. Resolution 13964 __requesting specific actions to influence PERS (11
Board to change its investment policies.
20. Minute Order 2980 _awarding bid for purchase, of styrene/butadiene (13
latex to Textile Rubber & Chemical Co. in amount of $5.68 per gallon.
21. Minute Order 2981 awarding bid for purchase of HFMS-2h Anioni.c (13
asphaltic emulsion to Koch Asphalt in amount of $171.69 per ton.
22. Minute Order 2982 awarding bid for new 1000 GPM Pumper to Albro Fire ( 81
Equipment in amount of $89,392.50 and Resolution13965 amending budget:. 6
23. Minute Order 2983 awarding bid for purchase of (4) mobile radio (11
units and (2) portable radio units to General Electric Company
in amount of $5,692.20.
24. Minute Order 2984 awarding contract for Palm Springs Airport
Rent-A-Car Ready Lot lighting modification to Thorson Electric, (51
Inc. in amount of $4,977.28.
25. Minute Order 2985 awarding contract for furnishing and installa- (11
tion of new carpeting in Palm Springs City Hall to Beauty-Kist
Carpets in amount of $65,895.96.
26. Minute Order 2986 awarding contract for furnishing and installa- (11
tion of wooden floor systemin Leisure Center Multipurpose Room to
M. F. Bolster Flooring Co. in amount of $17,906.00.
27. Minute Order 2987 awarding contract for excavating trenches for
street lighting installation at various locations to Thorson (13
Electric is amount of $9,203.00.
28. Resolution 13966 approving Tentative Parcel Map 17878 located (11
on Montalvo Way between Valdivia Way and Chia Road - industrial
warehouse. (Mainero, Smith & Assoc. /SRS Investment)
29. Resolution 13967 approving Final Subdivision Map 17431 for SW (13
corner Tahquitz-McCallum/Hermosa Drive - professional condominium
complex. (Hugh Kaptur/Heathman Hill Associates)
30. Resolution 13968 declaring intent to vacate a. portion of (14
MacCarthy Road from Radio Road to Las Vegas Road, and
set hearing thereon for October 7, 1981 .
31 . Resolution 13969 approving agreement with Fuqua Homes, Inc. (11
to provide and install modular structure on City Hall site.
32. Resolution 13970 authorizing license agreement with Plaza (13
Investment Co. to erect structure over public r/w on South
Palm Canyon Drive at entrance to the "Old Plaza."
33. Motion requesting Police Chief to ask POST to perform a (11
deployment study for the Police Department.
34. Resolution 13971 approving 12-month extension for Tentative (13
Tract Map 15638 for property on the SE corner of E. Palm
Canyon and Barona Road, time share condominium and restaurant
project - Mainiero/H. Maxwell .
Council Minutes
9-2-81 Page 25
35. Resolution 13972 approving 12-month extension for Tentative
Tract Map 16384 for property on the east side of North Indian (137)
Avenue, between Paseo El Mirador and Mel Avenue, 61 units,
Webb/E.Babic.
36. Resolution 13973 approving Tentative Tract Map 17503 for property
on Tahquitz-McCallum, between Sunrise and Avenida Caballeros, (137)
profession office, KWL/III F Investment.
37. Resolution 13974 approving Tentative Parcel Map 17854 (119)
for property on Sunrise Way, north of Baristo Road,
retirement home, Webb/Goldrich, Kest & Assoc.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and unanimously
carried, that Resolutions 13959 through 13974 and Minute
Orders 2979 through 2987, be adopted; Beirich abstaining
on Minute Orders 2984 and 2987, and Rose abstaining on
Resolution 13973.
REPORTS & REQUESTS: (Library 80-81 Report Filed)
38. CITY COUNCIL reports or requests
a) At request of Councilwoman Ortner, staff requested
to check-out public address system at the Pavilion
for fidelity.
39. PUBLIC reports or requests - None
40. STAFF reports or requests - None
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business at 1 a.m. , Mayor declared
the meeting adjourned. ^
JUDITH SUMICH
\ City Clerk