HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/3/1982 - MINUTES CITY Ur, PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 3, 1982
A Regular Meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor
Doyle, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, on
Wednesday, March 3, 1982, at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Field, Ortner, Rose and
Mayor Doyle
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the salute to the Flag and a moment
of silent invocation.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY : Mayor declared the meeting
adjourned for the purpose of convening as the Community Redevelop-
ment Agency.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and unanimously
carried, that the minutes of February 3, 1982 be approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1 . AA CASE 3.464 - EL DORADO MOBILE HOME PARK APPEAL
Recommendation : That the Council consider appeal from
Planning Commission action for revised landscape plan
for a portion of the common landscape area in the El
Dorado Mobile Home Park. Mayor noted this item was not
reviewed at the last study session.
Director of Community Development reviewed his report,
dated March 3, 1982, and displayed plans approved by
the Planning Commission, noting that the major difference
between that which was submitted and that which was
approved relates to the lawn portion, which was proposed
to be replaced with gravel , and noted display presented
by Landscape Arch itect Buccino, which showed the lots
on either side of the green area, as originally approved
for the project. He stated that the plan includes (111 )
other improvements which were approved by the Commission,
with the condition that the grass area be restored, and
that the applicant has appealed that condition.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Jack Glover, property manager for El Dorado, stated that
the original plan was in an effort to comply with request
by DWA to conserve water, and it was not without merit;
that he believed the DWA was trying to stress that if
such measures were not undertaken, something similar
might become mandatory in the future; that when the
park was developed, the number of spaces was reduced
by four and the open area expanded, and following
an occupany of 50%, an additional five spaces were
eliminated and tennis court and swimming pool were
installed in the northerly portion of the park; that
the proposed improvement is adjacent to 35 spaces,
which effects only 9+% of the total number of spaces;
that he did not believe the plan would do anything
but enhance the park; and that he did not believe they
would be spending in excess of $35,000 to do otherwise.
4S
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 2
1 . AA CASE 3.464 (Continued)
Michael Buccino, Landscape Architect, stated that he was
retainedfor both the original work and the improvement;
that the trees planted originally have a 10-year maturity;
that trees roots have surfaced to the ground; that the
grassed area is shaded and not as "bright a picture"
as it once way; that the various mobilehome owners have
installed shrubs and flowers, which enhances the area ;
that the plan presented was one step further than as it
was originally landscaped; that the removal of the lawn
area was in an effort to eliminate irrigation problems;
that he does not believe the proposal is a step backwards ;
and that he believes it is a quality project.
In answer to question by Council , Mr. Buccino staled
that because of surface irrigation, there was no need
for .tree roots to extend to any depth; and he believed
the area had suffered from over-watering and was a
question of improper irrigation timing.
CONT'D
Harry Berman, 251 Laredo Drive, stated he represented (111 )
the mobilehome park tenants and homeowners; that the
green area was part of the initial sales campaign.,
and that the park was rated "5 stars;" that the rating
no longer seems important since footpaths are not
maintained, the grass -is .brown, and streets have -been
blocked by rocks; that he desired the park to be
restored to the way it was; and that it did not seem
plausible to, him that the small amount of water used
on the grass would be a ,deprivation to the desert.
Ruth Crow, 12 Club Circle, stated that she has resided
in the park for ten years, and that until August, 1981 ,
there was a grassed-drainage 'area 'on the west side,
which has been replaced with asphalt.
Dr. Nelson, Desert Rose Drive, stated that the grass
has a cooling effect; that he believes the graved
will intensify heat; that water will be used to keep
dust controlled; that the trees shed leaves, which
are then mechanically blown away, causing, noise_and
debris; that leaves blown off the, gravel ,, will result,
in flying rocks ; and that he has paid $15 per moniAi
in additional space rent for the privilege of adjoining
the grass.
David Crow, 12 Club Circle Drive, on behalf of GSMOL,
read portions of its letter to him, dated March 1 ,
1982, a copy of which is on file in the Office of
the-City Clerk, and stated that the park owner did
not meet and consult with tenants.
City Attorney stated that the letter referred to by
Mr. Crow covers the area addressed in his report i:o
the Council , dated March 2, 1982, a copy ,of which is
on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and relates
to a matter separate from planning issues ; which is
a separate obligation of the park owner to meet and
consult with tenants.
Mr. Crow stated that a similar situation was brought
to court in a successful action by GSMOL; and that there
has only been one meeting with the park owner, which
related to matters brought to attention by the tenants.
In response to inquiry by the Mayor, approximately 150
people in the audience raised their hand as being in
opposition to the appeal .
J
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 3
1 . AA CASE 3.464 (Continued)
Al Erdang, park resident, stated that the grass area was
a selling feature of the park; that its elimination would
not conserve water; that if there were an all-out effort
in the City for water conservation, tenants would be
willing to cooperate; that he believed the real reason
for the improvement relates to restrictions under rent
control and percentage of profits, and that owners must
look for cost savings to offset that loss; and that he
felt there should be other ways to save money.
Wayne Anderson, 20 Club Circle Drive, commented on why
he moved to the park and things he enjoys about it;
and stated that the tree roots only became exposed
when the grass was removed; that the lease calls for
maintenance of roads, grass, pools, and amenities in
place at the time of the lease, but that does riot
mean removal and no changes can be made in the lease
without written agreement by both parties. CONT 'D
(111 )
Frank Boyd, 382 Club Circle, chairman of the "negotiating
committee" and Presidentof the local GSMOL Chapter, stated
that the grass area adds appeal to the project;, that the
residents are elderly and would have a problem walking
on stones; that he did not believe the project was to
save water, but related to profits; that he supports
restoring the grass area as well as the grass areas
on the west side of the park which were replaced with
asphalt; that he has not found any official record
to support contention that the grass area was for
a density bonus; and that the "negotiating committee"
was formed to solve problems regarding rental agreements
and other problems, and there has been no discussion
with the management prior to removal of the grass.
Irving Margoleas, park resident, stated that areas being
watered and overwatered and create "rivers" and conserva-
tion does not mean to stop watering; and suggested that
the Council delete the brick and benches, require restora-
tion of lawns and flowers, and the drainage areas to grass,
and that detailed plans for Bolero Road frontage be submitted,
and that implementation begin within 30 days and completed
within 60.
Bernard Sturkop, park resident, stated that the "negotiating
committee" was not created by unanimous agreement of the
tenants; that he was not aware of park management ever
refusing to negotiate with tenants on a one-to-•one basis;
that most of the spaces have gravel around the mobilehome
unit, as well as shrubs; that at one time there was a curb
around the grass area, which tenants complained about and
which the management then installed a ramp and rails; that
the park is one of the few in the City to have received
a rent rebate, and to have received less of a rent increase
than allowed; that he believed the gravel would add beauty to
the park; that people in the park who use the asphalt drainage
area for parking are not complaining about it; that the
grass area has to be seeded semi-annually; and that he
believed eventually all spaces would have individual
water meters.
[1�v
Council Minutes 2
3-3-82 Page 4
I . AA CASE 3.464 (Continued)
Shirley Germain, 224 Lawn Sing, commented on her experiences
in terms of walking on grass and tripping on pebbles.
Mr. Glover, stated that the Civil Code requires t;ia't
tenants may request a meeting with the management,
either individually or to be represented by a spokesman
if it is a large group of tenants ; that when such a.
written request is made, it must be honored and that
they do so; that Mr. Boyd had requested such a meeting
and indicated that he was head of the negotiating
committee, and was told that unless there were signatures
of the tenants who wished to be represented, management
would meet with Mr. Boyd as though he were representing
himself only; that he never received any written request
signed by tenants wishing to be represented; that regarding
space prices, those next to the green area pay the same
as other corners, whether it is grass or gravel ; That CONT 'D
regarding density, the original plan showed 286 units, (111 )
of which 282 were constructed and an additional five
were later removed, so there was a decrease in density,
not an increase; that the landscape architect indicated
that water could be reduced, but actually presented a
complete plan for water conservation for the entire
park, which he believed was very good; and that if the
appeal is approved, Mr. Buccino would supervise installa-
tion to insure that the plan will be installed accordingly.
In answer to question by Council , Mr. Glover stated
that the drainage area was never a part of the landscape
plan; that grass was originally planted; that it was one
area in an overall conservation plan and asphalt was
installed as it could have been originally installed;
that the change to asphalt was made before it was
known that architectural approval was required, and he
was not certain whether that would have been a
part of the approval since it was not part of the
original landscape plan ; and that his attorney advised
him that the Civil Code provisions applied to service
in the park and not to landscaped areas, and that it
would not be necessary to meet and consult with the
tenants, although he could see that it probably would
have been a good idea.
In answer to question by Council , City Attorney stated
that the City does not enforce the Civil Code provision;
that without written request, there would not be aiiy
need for meet and consult; and that in its ususal applica-
tion, "meet and consult" means to meet and discuss, and
does not mean that the tenants wishes have to be followed,
only listened to.
Mr.:,Crow stated that the landlord is required to give
six months notice to change the rules and procedures,
and 60-days in some instances; and that he disagreed
with an interpretation which would indicate that the
tenant must wait until after the fact before being
able to meet and consult.
There being no further appearances, the hearing was
closed.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 5
1 . AA CASE 3.464 (Continued)
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that the project was approved and
developed in the County prior to the area being annexed
to the City; that he did not recall whether the four
30-ft drainage swails were landscaped or whether the
County even required landscape approval ; that if the
area was grass at the time of annexation, it would
be a part of that which was accepted by the City,
and any change would require City approval ; that the
Planning Commission approved brick and benches, the
restoration of the lawn areas, the restoration of the
asphalt to lawn area, and the submittal of detailed
planting and irrigation plans for the Bolero Road
frontage; and that if the applicant decided not to
pursue the improvement, once the appeal were ruled
on by the Council , it should be referred back to the
Commission.
Councilman Rose stated that it was not helpful to
try and determine whether there has been a violation
of the Civil Code or if the landlord is gouging; that
the Council is not an appeal board for such issues,
nor were they part of the Planning Commission decision,
nor is water conservation an issue; that park manage-
ment seems to recognize that it should have listened CONT 'D
to the tenants, that that which was done was something (111 )
the tenants did not want and was done without approval
of the City; that the tenants desire the green area
which he believed was more attractive; that he believed
the tenants have a right to expect that and the applicant
should abide by the Planning Commission decision; that
he was uncertain as to the status of the brick and
benches and perhaps that should go back to the Com-
mission; that he believed the tenants would be
satisfied if just the grass areas were restored; and
that he supports restoring the drainage areas to
grass.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that from her experience,
walking on gravel causes it to loosen and get into
the street and people trip on it; that excess watering
was reported by the landscape architect, which caused
roots to surface; that the meandering green belt is
a relief from other areas in the park; that the
asphalt areas may be conducive to parking, but do
not permit water percolation that the grass swails
would accomplish; that she realized the park manage-
ment believed it was doing the right thing; and that
she believed those who pay more for the privilege of
enjoying it, need to have the grass restored.
It was moved by Field, and seconded by Ortner, that
the Planning Commission action be upheld and that
the appeal be denied.
Mayor stated that he supported the motion, but questioned
the possibility of the Planning Commission desiring to
review the conditions relative to the benches; and
offered a substitute motion that the appeal be denied,
and the Commission action be upheld, with exception
that the condition regarding the benches be referred
back to the Commission ; said substitute motion failed
for lack of a second.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 6
1 . AA CASE 3.464 (Continued)
In answer to question by Council , Director of Community
Development stated that review of the detailed plans .
by the Commission will not be subject to public hearing
process, but interested parties may address the Com--
mision on items on its agenda under a public comments
portion; and that in review of detailed plans, applicant
would have ability to request removal of the benches.
He also stated that the Commission 's approval included
that applicant comply by beginning within 30 days and
that the entire project be completed within six months ;
and 'that those items requested by the Commission should
not take a long time, and the time-frame could be
adjusted if the Council so desired.
Councilman Field stated that he did not agree that there
should be a time frame; that the intent of the Commission
and Council would be upheld by the motion, which places
the applicant in the situation of starting within 30
days and completing the project within six months, which
he believed was fair and equitable; and that the park
management has spoken and listened to the concerns of
the tenants.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously
carried, that the original motion be amended to require CONT 'D
that the work be accomplished within a 60-day period (111 )
from this date; after which, the original motion, as
amended, was unanimously approved.
2. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 133 - AMENDING RES. OF INTENTION
Recommendation: That the Council overrule protests to
an increase in interest rates for Assessment District
133 and authorize solicitation of bids for construction
and signalization of mid-block crosswalks in the CBD.
Mayor stated that he would abstain from discussion
and voting, and turned the meeting over to the Mayor
pro tem; at 9:20 p.m. , Mayor excused himself from
the meeting.
City Manager stated that a recent newspaper article
was erroneous in that only ten property owners are
effected financially in terms of participating in (56)
the project costs, plus the Redevelopment Agency.
Redevelopment Director explained the project, which
includes crosswalks mid-block between Andrea s/Tahquitz,
Bullock's/Old Plaza, and Vineyard/Las Casuelas Terraza,
all of which will be signalized, and reconstruction
of intersection crosswalks, and curb improvements in
front of the Old Plaza and Desert Inn Fashion Plaza;
that the assessment district is for the purpose oi'
helping the property owners who have agreed to pay
for the signals to finance their share over a period
of years, noting that Desert Inn Fashion Plaza will
pay about 50% and Bullock' s will pay its share up•.front;
that the purpose of the hearing is to consider an
increase in the interest rate from 7% to 12%; and
that the funds budgeted by the Redevelopment Agency
are less than the estimate reconstruction costs , and
upon receipt of bids within the estimates , recommenda-
tion for a budget amendment will be made to cover the
additional amount.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 7
2. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 133 (Continued)
In answer to question by Mayor pro tem, Redevelopment
Director stated that the Las Caseulas Terraza property
owner will be paying a portion of the assessment, but
the business itself will not be assessed.
City Attorney stated that if the relationship between
the business owner and the property owner is such that
the Mayor pro tem would generate a financial conflict,
then he would recommend an abstension.
Redevelopment Director stated that the property owners CONT "D
effected by the assessment district have agreed to it, (56)
with the exception of the Mayor, who abstained; that
physical construction of the sidewalks is intended to
be funded by the Redevelopment Agency through the use
of tax increment funds; that the project is an aesthetic
improvement and is part of a total concept of improving
the downtown area; that CalTrans has agreed to the
project, which meets the City's and Redevelopment
Agency 's objective of moving pedestrians in the CBD,
but which is contrary to CalTrans ' objective of moving
traffic; and that he recommended authorizing call for
bids for the Agency's and assessment district 's portions
of the project.
In answer to question by Mayor pro tem, City Attorney
stated that the Mayor pro tem could participate in
conducting the meeting, but recommended he abstain
from voting.
In answer to question by Council , Redevelopment Director
stated that the crosswalks would be permanent; that they
are an aesthetic approach to placing crosswalks in the
downtown area; that CalTrans denied the use of Baumanite
(stamped concrete) because it was believed not to be
an appropriate material for wheelchairs;' that the project
is significantly different from that originally conceived;
that merchants have not been solicited; and that the P.S.
Project Steering Committee has reviewed the project, but
he was not aware whether it felt it is one issue which
should be considered.
City Manager stated that this is one of the projects which
the Committee was apprised of as happening within the
next few months and that it probably would be April
before bids were considered; that he believed there was
time to use that vehicle to disseminate information about
the project, as well as using the time to pull together
additional graphics; and that if the concrete were not
desirable, direction could be given to staff to bid an
alternate item.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that the crosswalks would
be smoother and easier to maintain; that she was aware
of the price increase and favored the project; and that
she believed it will add to the appearance of downtown.
In answer to question by Council , Redevelopment Director
stated that the signals are absolutely required in order
to have the mid-block crosswalks; that he would have no
hesitancy in surveying some of the merchants; and that
he believed they would support the project and see its
benefits.
45
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 8
2. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 133 (Continued)
Mayor pro tem declared the hearing opened.
Don Lawrence, Chairman of the P.S. Project Steering
Committee, expressed concern as to the need for
soliciting downtown merchants before taking
action. He also stated that recent group meetings
with merchants has indicated perception by
merchants that they should be solicited and feel
they are not being asked; and that they are the ones
whose businesses will be effected by the project.
Bill Sorrentino stated that he failed to see why
there would be any objection and that the project
does not effect the merchants ; and that there should
be a greater use of concrete crosswalks which are CONT'D
easier to maintain. (56)
Ron Kubler asked whether hearing has been set on
the closing of Andreas Road and how it would be
effected by this project.
There being no further appearances, Mayor pro tem
declared the hearing closed.
City Manager stated that regarding Andreas Road, a
preliminary study was made, but before it receives
any planning review, a more definitive study will be
made, which will take this project into account;
that the interim period before receipt of bids and
final decision would be a good time to bring people
up-to-date what is being proposed, and to be in a
position of making sure people know what might
effect their business or property; that it was an
unfair statement that no merchants knew of the project,
since there were merchants on the DDAC who actively
supported the project; and that one consideration
should be timeliness of the project, in order to
avoid any conflict with the height of the season,
and if the project were to move ahead soon, it could
start in June, to minimize any impact in that regard.
Councilman Rose stated that the project, in particu-
lar, the signals, seems to benefit everyone; that he
was not sure about voting on the concrete crosswalks,
although there is logic for that; that he realized the
action was to call for bids, however, he believed ft
would be a total mistake not to listen to the merchants
and would be a backward step that could cost more in
the long-run; and that notice should be given for a.
meeting at which merchants could be heard.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page g
2. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 133 (Continued)
Councilwoman Ortner stated that this date was adver-
tised as a hearing, and there has been very little
response from the public; that she has heard nothing
adverse about the project; that she would support
the expenditure and the project; and that she would
not be opposed to surveying the merchants.
Redevelopment Director stated that the initial reason
for the hearing was to consider the assessment district,
and there has been no objection from thoseeffected,
which would allow the interest rate increase; and that
he would like guidance from the Council as to surveying CONT 'D
the merchants and what would assure the Council that (55)
there is constituent support for the project.
City Manager stated that in light of the concern as
to some means for people to be more informed of the
project, this matter should possibly be continued;
and that if that means is not accomplished in two
weeks, then the matter should be continued again.
Councilman Rose suggested that a letter be sent and
merchants be given the opportunity to respond.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and carried
by the following vote, that this matter be tabled:
AYES: Ortner and Rose
NOES: None
ABSENT:. Doyle
ABSTAIN : Field
Mayor returned and joined the meeting.
4 5
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 10
3. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 138 - BOGERT TRAIL BRIDGE
Background: On January 6, 1982, Council adopted various
actions relating to the above district, including declaring
intent, and determining public interest and necessity
regarding certain properties; and set this as time and
place for hearings. Recommendation: That the Council
adopt specific actions, including overruling •protests,
approving contribution to the district, confirming
assessments , awarding the contract, accepting proposal
for sale of bonds, approve agreement for special counsel
re eminent domain proceedings, and order eminent domain
proceedings.
Director of Community Development reviewed his report,
dated March 3, 1982, and reported that favorable bids (56)
were received for a 2-lane bridge, and the assessment
for the majority of parcels' is $2,588. 52, which is
approximately $238 over the original estimate per parcel
for a 1-lane bridge; that the proposed agreement with
Brown & Nazarek relates to services regarding eminent
domain, proceedings; and that Dr. Tynberg, one party
affected by the resolution of necessity, submitted a.
letter requesting to be heard.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Edward L. Lambert, 3330 Andreas Hills Drive, stated that
the bid is most acceptable; that they have received no
protests to the assessment, and only one request for
clarification; that he has received many telephone calls
indicating satisfaction with, the bids ; and that 85.2%
of the property owners originally supported the project.
Mayor inquired if anyone wished to be heard regarding
eminent domain proceedings; there were no appearahces.
There being no further appearances, Mayor declared
the hearing closed.
Right-of-Way,Agent stated that he has talked with Dr.
Tynberg after he had submitted his request for hearing,
and his main concern related to the appraisal and the
amount being discussed; and that he believed Dr. Tynberg
was not present since he was advised that his concern
was not a point of discussion by the Council under the
resolution. ,'
Resolutions 14168 through 14174 and Minute Order 3058,
approving the recommendations generally described above,
were presented.
In answer to question by Council , City Attorney stated
the issues addressed in letter from Paul Selzer, attorney
representing Dunphy Industries did not have to be addressed
at this time, but would have to be so addressed if the
City is to recover its front costs.
City Manager stated that those issues do not effect the
assessment district; that he believed it to be a matter
of good faith and the developer is on record of be willing
to pay his appropriate cost of the bridge; that it would
not be possible to firm agreement in the immediate future;
and that he believed the issues could be worked out and
it was worth the risk to proceed.
It was moved 'by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously
carried, that Resolutions 14168 through 14174 and Minute
Order 3058 be adopted.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 11
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
LEGISLATIVE ACTION:
4. ZONING CASE 5.0197 & GPA 5.0198 - INDIAN LANDS
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she would abstain from
discussion and voting.
Recommendation : That the Council amend both the General
Plan and Zoning Map to reflect the changes approved by
the Tribal Council on appeal to it by Ray Patencio.
Director of Community Developed reviewed his report of
March 3, 1982, and stated that the action recommended
is a followup of action taken by the Tribal Council on (149)
appeal to it and puts into place those items which the
Tribal Council has changed from the last action taken
by the City Council .
Councilman Rose stated that he would vote in favor
because of the contract with the Tribal Council and (101 )
to do otherwise would be a breach of the contract.
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 SECTION 12 AND 14, T4S, R4E AND
SECTION 18, T4S, R5E.
Resolution 14175, amending the General Plan, was presented;
after which, it was moved by Rose, seconded by Field, and
unanimously carried, Ortner abstaining, that Resolution
14175 be adopted; and that further reading of the Ordinance
be waived and the Ordinance be introduced for first reading.
5. HOTEL SMOKE DETECTOR INCENTIVE PROGRAM
Recommendation : That: the Council approve an incentive
program to encourage voluntary installation of approved
smoke detector systems in hotels by providing $10 incentive
per detector installed during calendar year 1982; and
appropriate $75,000 therefor.
(87 &
Fire Chief reviewed his report, dated March 3, 1982, 61 )
and responded to question by Council that requiring
retrofitting is difficult to impose and it was believed
that thisstep would be an encouragement and not a
detriment or major upheaval ; and that by 1985, retrofitting
may be a requirement, which might be either at local option
or through uniform codes.
Resolution 14176, amending the budget as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Rose, seconded
by Ortner, and unanimously carried, that Resolution 14176
be adopted.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 12
6. ORDINANCES FOR SECOND READING & ADOPTION (Introduced 2-17-82)
City Clerk read title of ordinancell57, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP BY
REZONING PROPERTY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER (149)
OF RAMON ROAD AND BOGIE ROAD FROM "0" (OPEN
LAND) TO M-1-P (PLANNED INDUSTRIAL PARK) .
and title of Ordinance 1158, as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AS
IT RELATES TO ESTABLISHING A LISTING OF (103)
ACCEPTABLE USES WITHIN VARIOUS CITY FACILITIES
LOCATED IN "0" ZONES.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unani-
mously carried, that further reading be waived.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and carried
by the following vote, that Ordinances 1157 and 1158 be
adopted.
AYES: Ortner, Rose & Doyle
NO: Field
ABSENT: None
7. TWIN PALMS .DRIVE SEWER - CONTRACT AWARD
Recommendation : That the Council award contract to Jones
Brothers Construction Co. , in amount of $91 ,211 , for
sanitary sewer main in Twin Palms Drive and Calle Palo
Fierro.
(128)
Minute Order 3059, awarding the contract as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Rose, seconded
by Field, and unanimously carried, that Minute Order 3059
be adopted.
B. CLAIMS & DEMANDS & PAYROLL WARRANTS
Resolutions 14177 and 14178, approving Payroll Warrants
and Claims & Demands, were presented; after which, it was
moved by Field, seconded by Rose, and unanimously carried, (86)
that Resolutions 14177 and 14178 be adopted.
9. PHOTOVOLTAIC RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Recommendation: That the Council approve the installation
of a General Electric PHOTOVOLTAIC research and development
project on City land to ,the rear of City Hall .
Energy Coordinator stated that Southern California Edison
was desirous of acquiring an R & D site and offered in (117)
return to trade the electricity which would be generated' & 147)
thereby for use over the next three years in return for
installation of fencing and grading and utilization of
City-owned property. He stated that the Energy Commission
is recommending approval of the project.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously
carried, that the project be approved.
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 13
REPORTS & REQUESTS
10. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS - Received & Ordered Filed
a) CVB - December, 1981
11 . CITY COUNCIL reports or requests
a) CATV : Concerns were expressed by Councilmembers
relative to poor telephone contact and service
outages in connection with Warner Cable, and
request for information as to what actions the
Council might be able to take.
Mayor stated that CATV regulations are facing
changes at the Federal level which could impact
local jurisdiction control , as well as the impact
of the Boulder court case; and suggested that this
matter be set for a non-agenda study session for
review.
b) At request of Councilwoman Ortner, City Manager
stated that a report would be provided to the
Council regarding rummage sales on Palm Canyon
Drive.
c) At request of Councilman Rose, Staff to
report on odors emanating from Smoke Tree Stables.
e) At request of Councilman Rose, Staff to report
regarding condition of Angel Stadium field -in
connection with recent rodeo.
f) At request of Councilman Rose, Staff to report
regarding use of small City vehicles, without
license plates, on streets.
g) Consensus of Council : Because of Passover starting
at sundown on April 7, the March 17 meeting will be
adjourned to April 6, and no meeting will be held
on April 7, 1982.
h) Tennis Club Time Share Project Variance: Councilman
Rose stated that tentative approval was given for (146)
the variance by the Planning Commission; and if final
approval were granted by the Commission, he requested
that the matter be brought to the Council for consideration.
i ) Mayor highlighted some of the topics addressed at recent
National League of Cities meeting which he attended; and
stated that the purpose of the policy committee is to
formulate policies to be acted on by the general assembly
of the League later in 1982.
12. PUBLIC reports or requests - None
1:3. STAFF reports or requests
a) Time Share Solicitation on Palm Canyon Drive: City Manager
stated that everything that can be done is being done to (64)
enforce existing ordinances; that if this type operation
is viewed as something which should be prohibited., them
4 F;
Council Minutes
3-3-82 Page 14
a) Continued
it will be necessary to amend the ordinances and staff is
examining changes which can be done to lead to that; that
if the property owners on Palm Canyon Drive would not
allow or "rent" their private right-of-ways in front of CONT'D
their stores, the existing ordinance could be enforced ( 64)
and the operation prohibited; that if there is a desire
to stop this type operation entirely, then the Codes
will have to be changed in order to allow regulating
what happens. on private right-of-way; and that staff
is currently enforcing the Handbill Ordinance, which
allows stopping people from canvassing on the public
right-of-way.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business at 10:40 p.m. , Mayor '
declared the meeting adjourned to Friday, March 5, 1982,
at 4 p.m. , in the Large Conference Room, City Hallo
w� C�L
JUDTTH SUMTCH
City Clerk