HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/8/1981 - MINUTES CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8, 1981
A Regular Adjourned Meeting of the City Council was called to order
by Mayor Doyle, in the Large Conference Room, City Hall , 3200
Tahquitz-McCallum Way, on Tuesday, September 8, 1981 , at 2:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Beirich, Field, Rose
and Mayor Doyle
Absent; Councilmember Ortner (Mrs. Ortner entered
at 2:40 during AFCOM item)
(Note: Also present for Joint Tribal Council-City Council hearings :
Chairman Ray Patencio, Barbara Young, Moraino Patencio, Richard
Milanovich, Sue Young and Lucille Torro; also Tribal Council Attorney
and Planning Consultant)
1 . AFCOM
City Manager stated that basic issue relates to condition
of agreement of a firm financial commitment by August 26,
1981 , and that formal action would be required to amend
that date; that staff believes that financial commitment
is now in order and a number of understandings need to be (85
discussed before action is taken; that there is still a
continued hope for UDAG and mortgage revenue bonds, but
a yes or no situation is outside of the City's control ;
that there would be no change in the physical plant pro-
posed, i .e. , the split between mobilehome and modular
units; that there is still no guarantee that all 400
mobilehomes will be built on schedule, except the first
85 spaces; and that there is a commitment to start the
first phase wihin 5 days. He stated that changes relate
to lifting of the profit limitation for the modular units;
that all subsidies involved in UDAG and HCD would go to
the mobilehome portion of the project; and that $5,000
per modular unit would be paid as each unit is developed,
which would fund the mobilehomes - i .e. , the 341 modular
units would fund 200 of the 400 mobilehome spaces. He
stated if UDAG comes through, it would cover the remaining
400 units, however, the primary issue is what happens if
it does not come through. He reviewed the subsidies, as
follows :
UDAG $1 .7 million
FUDRICKS - 1 .7
CDBG .5
General Fund 4
4.3 million
In addition, about $400,000 of the development will be
picked up by Fredricks . The value of the reduced land
lease is about $1 ,000 per unit; calculations roughly based
on a comparison to the Heers project - deferral of City
fees to be done equally for all such projects. Ile stated
that he did not believe the City will be subsidizing the
modular unit more than other bonus-density projects. He
stated it is important that the project be the first
priority if mortgage revenue bond financing is obtained;
that the mobilehome park will not be financed until the
modular portion is completed; and that he did not believe
the modular portion was being treated favorably compared
to other projects, since similar projects 'do not have a
mobilehome park as a condition. He stated that Item #1
in the Fredricks letter was intended to refer to the
$5,000 per unit, and that should be made explicit.
Council. Minutes
9-8-81 Page 2
1 . AFCOM (Continued)
In answer to question by Council , Assistant City Manager
stated that reference in the AFCOM letter, paragraph 2,
to "housing project" refers to the modular portion; and
that even if the 341 units are developed, without the
UDAG funds, the 400 spaces could not be completed.
Housing Coordinator stated that excluding the UDAG Iunds,
the remaining funding sources would enable constructing
a total of 200 spaces.
In answer to questions by Council , City Manager stated that
Item 9 of the Fredricks letter lifts the profit limitation
for the Fredricks portion of the project; that the AFCOM
profit limitation relates to the mobilehome portion that
it would be involved in; and that he believed it was under-
stood that the attempt was to get financial commitment for
the project on a yes or no basis; that there was no way
to bring this matter back to the Council in any other manner,
given the time element, and that it was important the Council
be involved in the financial details, recognizing that not
all things will be clearcut.
In answer to question by Council, Housing Coordinator stated
that with thei341 modular units, there would be 541 physical
units, and a remaining space availability for 200 mobilehome
spaces to be constructed, either through federal or state
assistance, without which, the 541 units would be the extent CONT'D
of this understanding.
(85)
In answer to question by Council , City Manager stated that
something can be written into the agreement which would give,
the City the ability to do something different with the
space for the remaining 200 mobilehome spaces.
In answer to question by Council , Mr. Dawson stated chat
Item #3 in his letter was not firm (relates to statement
that Fredricks & Lancer will manufacture 341 houses.)
In answer to questions by Council, City Manager stated that
Item 9 of the Fredricks letter could be clarified, in that
it was not intended that the density bonus should be superceded,
and that the price would not exceed that affordable to persons
whose income does not exceed 120% of median; that attempt will
be made immediately to amend the UDAG application; that he
believed thechange would improve the chances with HUD, since
funds would be expressly allocated to the mobilehome portion;
that if the Council chose not to act favorably, staff could
continue negotiating with other developers, with request that
the Council provide direction in terms of the kinds of conditions
that it would accept, with bottom line to guarantee securing
a quantified number of mobilehome spaces; and that he did not
believe the issues would be different from those now before
the Council , regardless of with whom the staff might be dealing.
Councilman Beirich stated that the AFCOM letter addresses
assignment of interest to Fredricks that Rredricks ' letter
refers to a partnership, and that the proposed resolution
refers to both relationships, all of which sound like AFCOM
intends to get out of the project.
lib
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 3
1 . AFCOM (Continued)
Mr. Dawson stated that was correct; that there is no profit
on the mobilehome portion; that Fredricks will get all of
the profit on the modular units , and what is left for AFCOM
is social commitment for the tenants being evicted.
Councilman Beirich stated he was concerned that by passing the
resolution,reference is made to a relationship between AFCOM
and Fredricks which the letter states does not exist, unless
it is construed that by stating that AFCOM will be making no
profit on the houses, that is inherent to what the resolution
provides.
As a result of discussion regarding intent of Item 2 in the
AFCOM letter, Mr. Dawson stated that "housing project" was
intended to refer to the modular units, and he would amend
his original letter to clarify that to read, "341 unit
housing project. . . "
(Note: At this point, Council continued further discussion, CON
pending conclusion of previously scheduled joint public. hearings (85`
with the Tribal Council ; after which, it resumed discussion on
this matters)
City Attorney stated during the recess, language was developed
to be included in the proposed resolution, worded so as not
to be viewed as a counter offer, but an acceptance and agree-
ment to the terms of the Fredricks letter, based on City
understanding of those terms and as clarified, therein. He
read proposed amendments, as follows:
4. The City Council acknowledges receipt of a letter of
commitment dated September 8, 1981 , from Fredricks
Development Corporation. The City Council accepts
the terms and conditions stated therein, subject to
the understandings stated in this paragraph, and
directs the City Manager and his staff to incorporate
such terms in any modifications of the Lease Agreement
or other appropriate documents pursuant to Section 3
hereof. It is the understanding of the City Council
in accepting and agreeing to the terms of said letter:
a) Upon sale of each modular unit, Fredricks Development
Corporation will donate to the City of 'Palm Springs the
sum of $5,000, to be used by City to fund a loan for
construction of all or part of the balance of the mobile
home park, in excess of the initial phase.
b) The modular housing units will be priced at such
level that said units will be affordable to persons whose
income does not exceed 120% of the median income in the
County of Riverside, in accordance with the City's
covenant control mechanism as expressed in Resolution
No. 13614 (adopted December 4, 1980) .
c) The $5,000 per unit donation referred to in sub-
paragraph (a) above shall not result in a price of each unit
greater than the price permitted by subparagraph (b) above.
d) Any offsite improvements required for the project
(including but not limited to completing of offsite
improvements constructed to lesser interim standards) ,
in excess of the $581 ,855 committed by City, as referred
to in paragraph number 3 of said Fredricks Development
Corporation letter, shall be provided at Fredricks '
expense.
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 4
1 . AFCOM (Continued)
5. In amending the Lease Agreement, as contemplated in
the foregoing paragraphs, provision should be made for
release of any portion of the demised premises which
shall not be developed within a reasonable time, to be
agreed upon, to enable City to arrange alternative
uses for such undeveloped portion of the land.
In answer to question by Council , Mr. Dawson stated that legisla-
tion has been signed by the President which provides For Section 8
new construction financing for mobilehomes and mobilehome parks,
which is a fine development as a back-up method that would pro-
vide the entire park; that an attorney has been retained in
Washington, D.C. , and it is hoped that demonstration ,project
funding might be secured, and with that caveat, it might be CONT'D
possible to complete the mobilehome portion without the (85)
dependence on the modular units, UDAG or mortgage revenue
bonds; and that only something completely beyond the control
of AFCOM or the City would preclude completing the first
phase by November 20, 1981 .
City Manager stated that City expenditure of funds on the
property has resulted in ability to lease the land at less
than market cost; that impact of mobilehome space on a monthly
basis is, ,at the most, about $10; and that if a facility ,is being
looked at to provide rents at the lowest rate, but roughly
at what people are now paying, then a funding mechanism or
subsidy will have to found for the additional $70-100 per
month per space - getting the $5,000 from each modular unit
is one way of doing that.
Councilman Rose stated that he did not see much choice but
to proceed, and considering the parks being closed, he believed
the risk must be taken and the Council must move forward.
Discussion ensued regarding concerns as to specifying what
constituted a "reasonable period of time" relative to the
development of land in excess of the 541 units, and the
inability to speak on behalf of Fredricks . Mr. Dawson
stated that the burden of paying rent on land that cannot
be used would compel the developer to seek relief from the
City, and thought it would be an agreeable suggestion to
discuss with Fredricks that the unused lease portion' is
cancellable subject to its lack of use.
Councilman Field stated that because of the uncertainties
he could not support the proposal , and that he would prefer
seeing the specific language as read by the City Attorney
and hearing from Fredricks ,
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she believed AFCOM could
commit itself, but was uncomfortable not to have Fredricks
involved face-to-face in the negotiations, particularly,
since it appears to relieve AFCOM and she was not secure
in where the City stands.
City Manager stated that possibly the Council could adjourn
its meeting to the next day; that he could not speak for
Fredricks ; and that he recognized that a lot of good faith
was involved in not having a firm commitment on everything,
but that all issues would be worked out.
City Attorney stated that he met with Mr. Cable, Executive
Vice-President of Fredricks on September 4, 1981 , and spoke
with the corporation 's banker, who indicated that the corpora-
tion could obtain the money on a signature in a matter of
minutes, or a letter of credit provided, and that it has the
necessary wherewithal to complete the first phase.
d�
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 5
1 . AFCOM (Continued)
Mayor stated that he has been supportive of the project and
recognized the time and effort spent in bringing it about;
that he recognized the degree of risk, but felt that since
the initial investment has been made, he would like to see
that be productive to some degree, and based on the financial
ability of Fredricks , this may be the last hope at this CON
juncture. (85
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, and carried
by the following vote, that Resolution 13975, acknowledging
participation of Fredricks Development Corporation in
AFCOM affordable housing venture, embodying above Sections
4 and 5 as read by City Attorney, be adopted:
AYES: Beirich, Rose & Doyle
NOES: Field & Ortner
ABSENT: None
JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH TRIBAL COUNCIL:
2. PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT - 174 LaVERNE WAY (JULES BLUM)
Consideration of appeal to the Tribal Council by Jules
Blum from City Council denial of appeal from pasting
as a public nuisance the enclosure of a patio cover at
174 La Verne Way, and order calling for the immediate
abatement thereof.
Tribal Councilmember Milanovich stated that since he
is acquainted with the appellant he would abstain.
(57
Director of Community Development reviewed actions of
the Architectural Advisory Committee, Planning Commission
and City Council , which are matters of record; noting
that building permit was obtained and inspections made
regarding the approved roof cover, and the enclosure was
made after final architectural inspection was made,
without an approved plan or building permit. lie stated
that if the applicant was not happy with the way in which
the project turned out, the point of appeal was at its
completion, and not proceeding with an illegal approach.
John Adams, Tribal Planning Consultant, stated that the
Indian Planning Commission reviewed the record, examined
photographs, and heard the appellant, after which, it
made certain findings, and made the following recommendation:
"Based on the testimony presented and on the preceding
findings, the Indian Planning Commission recommends that:
1 . The appeal be granted.
2. The appellant shall be permitted to obtain a valid
building permit for the window installation subject
to the usual permit fees, inspections, and penalty
fees (if any) which are applicable.
3. This action be considered unique and not precedent-
setting due to the various extenuating conditions
pertinent to this case and described in the accompanying
findings. "
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 5
2. PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT - 174 LaVERNE (Continued)
Allen Perrier, attorney representing Mr. Blum, distributed
copies of "appellant's statement, " a copy of which is on
file in the Office of the City Clerk, and made the following
comments :
a. Homeowner's Association support the application, and
statement in the record by the developer is incorrect.
b. Matter was resubmitted to the Planning Commission, based
on its merits, in December, but the Commission said it
was illegally constructed and it would not hear it.
c. Appeal was short-stopped by City staff and public nuisance
abatement proceedings started.
d. Suggestion by City Council that it be removed and then
appellant come back is not appropriate on a matter of
this significance.
e. There is no public detriment, and there would be nothing
inappropriate for any other unit to make the same change
if it was suited to the unit and necessary.
f. Tribal Council should provide response that projects on CONT'D
Indian Land do not need hard and fast rule that changes (57)
cannot be made if they are architecturally pleasing, and
a "federal case" should not have to be made to secure
an architectural change to a condominium project,
g. For this particular project, each condominium owner owns
the underlying lease for his lot.
h. After roof changes made, applicant found it did not suit
his purposes, and he did not want to make his health an
issue; declarations are contained in the record that the
room is essential to the couple.
i . Addition makes sense and adds to the value of the property,
and would be an injustice to have to remove it and then
come back and seek Planning Commission action.
j. There are provisions in the Code when it is violated, one
of which is a double fee and the other is that it satisfy
reasonable minds.
Mayor stated that if the project had not been ill-conceived
and illegal , it would not be an issue today, and he objected
to contentions that the City has been unfair.
Tribal Council Chairman stated that the Tribal Council would
act in a responsible manner whatever the occasion and whatever
may result from that.
Jules Blum, 174 LaVerne, stated that he did not air health
reasons before, but since the glass enclosure has been made,
it has been an asset to him and his wife; that he was willing
to do whatever was necessary to satisfy the Tribal Council and
City to allow it to remain; and that he has total approval
from the Homeowner's Association and adjacent neighbors, noting
that his unit faces the pool and is not visible from the street.
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 7
2. PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT - 174 LaVERNE (Continued)
Tribal Council Chairman inquired if anyone else wished
to be heard.
Stewart Eisen, 226 N. Palm Canyon, questioned whether
the project would have been approved if submitted as it
is now, and if the only question is whether it should
or should not be glass enclosed.
Mr. Blum stated that the patio existed and there were no
new walls erected; that two walls were raised 4 feet; that
the roof was added and glass installed; and that the new
roof coincided with the existing roofline. CON
(57
Mr. Perrier stated that the enclosure meets code require-
emtns for ventilation and lighting, as determined by
the developer's director of construction, who is a
former City building inspector; and that it meets all code
requirements, or can be made to meet such requirements
with simple adjustments.
Director of Community Development stated that a total
enclosure was initially considered and found that it
should not totally enclosed, since all second story
balconies are open and one with a glass face was felt
to be inappropriate and the developer indication was
that it was only to be roofed; that total enclosure
resulted in the area becoming an interior portion of the
unit; and that it is the City's responsibility to insure
that buildings are constructed in accordance with building
codes, and it cannot rely on determinations made by others,
but must make the calculations necessary to determine if
it meets code.
Building & Safety Director explained how the calculations
are made, and stated that the enclosure may meet code,
but there was never any reason to have made such calculations
since no building permit had been applied for.
There were no further appearances, and Tribal Council
Chairman declared the hearing closed.
Tribal Council Chairman stated that he has not seen the
addition, but from the photographs, it appears to be a
minor alteration, and that he realized the City does not
establish the Uniform Building Code.
Mayor stated that he was not in agreement that the addition
should have been made, but was willing to listen to argument
to let it remain.
Councilman Rose stated that: the question is not one of
approving alterations, but whether a person may knowingly
violate a law; that two findings of the Indian Planning
Commission it would serve the public welfare and safety
are perhaps incorrect findings, and to agree that a person
may knowingly violate law is to condone an illegal action;
that there is no question that the appellant knew it was
illegal ; that he believes it is neither an injustice or
vindictive to expect people to obey laws and to tell them
they cannot violate them; that it would be inconsistent to
say that the City shall serve as the Tribal Council agent
in some matters and not in others, as suggested by appellant's
attorney; that the precedent setting cannot be ignored; that
Mr. Blum was not in an emergency situation, and if he had
a problem, he should have sought help rather than thumbing
�8
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 8
2. PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT - 174 IaVERNE (Continued)
his nose and trying to get away with something; that he
believes the illegal enclosure should be removed and the
appellant should go back to the Planning Commission; that
he understands there are others in the same condominium
project desiring to do the same thing; and that he believed CONT'D
it would be an injustice to both the Tribal Council (57)
and City Council if the appeal is granted.
Councilman Field stated that he did not think the appeal
should be allowed; that it was nose thumbing at both
Councils; and that the value of the community is puL in
jeopardy if rules are made up as things go along.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that are certain "abc's" and
those were not done; that Mr. Blum was totally aware of
what needed to be done and took the position that he
could get away with it; and that the enclosure is, in fact,
an added room to the unit.
Councilman Beirich stated that he respected Councilman
Rose 's comments , but recognized that sometimes there are
citizens who do things who are less aware of what is
going on than others, e.g. , engineers, architects, etc,
and he was willing to give the appellant the benefit
of the doubt, in addition to the orientation of the
unit and representations that neighbors are not complaining;
and that he felt this was a minor thing and felt the Council
could be dealing with something more important.
Tribal Council Chairman stated that the Tribal Council
would take the matter under advisement and report its
decision back to the City within 30 days.
3. P.D. 99 & PORTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE 5.0116
Consideration of appeal to the Tribal Council by Pritchard
Plaza from City Council denial of application for a
planned development district to develop a 160-unit
residential condominium project on a 30-acre site on
Crossley Road, north of the Municipal Golf Course; and
from City Council action to uphold City Planning Commission
recommendation for no change to the General Plan for said (116)
area in Section 20.
Mayor stated that he had received a telephone call that
the appeal was being withdrawn; and similar comment made
by Tribal Council Chairman.
John Adams, Tribal Council Planning Consultant stated
that Thomas Russell , attorney for Indian Landowner,
appeared at the September 2, 1981 , City Council meeting
and talked about acquisition of the property for the
Wastewater Treatment Plant; that he was made aware of the
Council 's action that date to approve M-1 zoning and
corresponding General Plan amendment; and that he thought
the appeal was to be withdrawn, however, he was uncertain
as to where it stands at this point. He stated that
telegram received from Mr. Russell is not specific as
to the status of the appeal .
Frank Bogert, 2787 Plaimor, stated that he was requested
to attend the meeting, but felt that it would be a waste
of time to discuss it since the zoning has been changed.
Tribal Council Chairman stated that in the absence of
anything farther from the appellant, the issue was moot.
Council Minutes
9-8-81 Page 9
COUNCIL reports or requests :
a) Councilwoman Ortner requested that any consideration of
a water-slide project should include consideration of
safety hazards of the slides; noting that this matter
was discussed at the last Tribal Council meeting.
In answer to question by Councilman Field, City Manager
stated proposed project will be coming before the
Planning Commission in the near future; that no ratification
of such a concept has been given by the Council ; and that
the project proposed is not one which is suspended, as in
Orange County, but rather underground.
b) Councilwoman Ortner requested that staff look into operations
of the Warner Cable service, particularly, with regard to
service, billing procedures, and staffing.
c) Councilman Beirich requested that staff look into signal
timing and causes for changes when no traffic involved at
intersection of Ramon Road and Avenida Caballeros.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business at 5 :45 p.m. , Mayor declared the
meeting adjourned.
JUDITH SUMICH
City Clerk