HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/15/1984 - MINUTES �)�a5
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 15, 1984
A Regular Meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor
Bogert, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz-McCallum Way, on Wednesday,
February 15, 1984, at 7:30 p.m. , at which Councilmembers Maryanov,
Smith and Mayor Bogert were in attendance. Pursuant to previous notice,
the meeting was adjourned to the P.S. High School Auditorium, and upon
convening, business resumed as follows.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Foster, Maryanov, Smith & Mayor
Bogert
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the salute to the Flag and a moment of
silence.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Mayor declared the meeting adjourned,
and upon reconvening, business resumed as follows.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
It was moved by Foster, seconded by Maryanov, and unanimously
carried, that Minutes of January 24, 31 and February 1 , 1984
be approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1 . A.D. 143 - SEWERS & EMINENT DOMAIN
Mayor stated that on January 18, 1984, the Council held the
public hearing on assessment district proceedings for sewer
improvements throughout the City, and on January 24 set this
as time and place for deliberations thereon. The Council also
continued hearing relative to eminent domain proceedings in
connection with the assessment district. Legal Counsel has
recommended that the hearing on the eminent domain proceedings
be further continued, until deliberations on the assessment
district have been finalized.
It was moved by Smith, seconded by Maryanov, and unanimously
carried, that the hearing on the eminent domain proceedings
be continued.
Mayor stated that the Council procedure for this matter would (56)
be to receive staff information generated since the hearing,
allow for Council questions and discussion, and then recess
until after the Public Comments portion of the Agenda.
Director of Community Development stated that the questions
and answers sheet addresses the sixteen questions noted at the
last public hearing, some of which deal with background to the
project; and that some attachments have been provided to the
list relative to a brief summary of the loan program for hardship
cases and City Attorney comments relative to the covenants.
He stated that since the public hearing, the State was contacted
regarding areas which appear to be hardship areas (about 345
properties) in addition to the 57 for which exemption was granted
by the State; that members of the local board took field trips
to the sites, and although official response has not been
received, informal comment is that an additional 18 properties
would qualify for the exemption; that on January 18, staff recom-
mended approval of the assessment district, except sub-areas
J and Fp; that since that time, alternatives were considered,
relative to the properties west of Palm Canyon, recognizing
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 2
1 . A.D. 143 (Continued)
that the terrain moves westward from a sandy soil condition
to the rocky, hillside conditions; that the 18 exemptions are
in Area I, and if those were deleted and the remaining area
re-bid, a different proposal might be received. He recommended
that Area I also be deleted; that relative to Areas E and F,
the terrain becomes more rocky to the west, and based on the
estimates for hook-up which have been submitted by residents,
these areas warrant more study; that a majority protests has
been received for Area F, and somewhat less than that in Area
E; that the Council may wish to consider deleting Areas E, F,
and I, with the understanding that such action would be for
the purpose of attaining additional information, and upon so
doing, another assessment district would be formed to include
those properties remaining in those area which do not have valid
grounds for exemption ; and that the legal pretest has been calcu-
lated, based on protests received up until the time set for
the hearing on January 18, 1984, which was the legal deadline
under statute for submitting protests.
(56)
Consulting Engineer Sanborn stated that the total protest to
the district is 37.04%, and by area, as follows:
A - 29.99
B - 18.02
C - 9.57
D - 7.69
E - 41 .25
F - 60.38
FP_ 71 .25
G - 22.20
H - 0
I - 38.59
J - 92.53
and that if Areas E, F, F I and J were deleted, the protest
would represent 31 .42%. P,
Director of Commmunity Development stated that relative to the
Episcopal Church, the property was re-evaluated, and based on
fact that the Church is willing to stipulate that the use will
not be changed, the assessment was reduced to represent that
of 12 residential units in that sub--area.
City Manager stated that temporary deletion of E-F-I recognizes
the possibility that there may be more topographical hardship
than believed to exist by the staff or engineer, and he felt
the district should proceed with the exception of J and Fp,
however, he believed these same areas will be returning with
only minor changes, and an opportunity will be provided to look
at topographical hardships; and that there will be some financial
hardship for some people in the district, and staff has begun
to address those needs and the Council indicated desire to review
criteria, potential for deferred loan, and less than market
interest rate, which will come back to the Council for review.
Councilman Maryanov stated that it was important to recognize
that the Council and staff were trying to respond to the concerns
raised at the hearing, and that the Council is bound by actions
that took place 10 years ago; that the expansion of the sewer
plant was not punitive, but to make the city a better place
in which to live; that residents paid about; $2,100 eight years
ago for sewer assessments, and A-B-C average $2,906, which is
not a large increase, and those units are not being punished;
that it is sensible to exempt J and Fp as well as some in Area
I ; that Area E ($6,900) and Area F ($9,700) have received
estimates of $20-30,000 to connect, and that staff recommendation
is to not act on those, but determine if those are correct;
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 3
1 . A.D. 143 (Continued)
that such action would not mean that the Council should not
act on the remaining areas, where the land is flat, the cost
reasonable, and there is a clear mandate from the State that
those should be connected; that the definition of hardship should
be clearly understood as to qualifying for financial assistance;
and that he did not think the Council had a right not to act
to meet the mandate.
Councilman Smith concurred with Mr. Maryanov' s comments, and
stated that the recommended action is responsive to the concerns
of the hillside units, and if there are concerns in the flat
areas, the Council should be responsive to those as well ; that
the Council needs to watch the economic hardship and direct
staff to report as to the number of applications received, those
qualified, and if the program is actually helping people.
The following represents people who spoke during the "Public (56)
Comments" portion of the Agenda; there were no other public
comments received relative to other matters.
J. K. Moran, attorney, stated that relative to Area A, he has
documentation showing that as of January 18, 1984, the protest
for the area exceeded 50% and additional protests submitted
raise that to 60%; that the environmental review process does
not expressly confirm the same project, i .e. , geology comments
are theoretical and not an exact site analysis, nor is the
possibility for blasting included; that sewers are installed
deeper than water lines and the same trench cannot be used;
that he would like a two-week delay in order to have an engineer
address these concerns; that the burden on the taxpayer has
not been addressed, in that the taxpayer foots the bill if the
assessment is not paid; that according to his sources with the
Water Quality Control Board, a person need only submit a request
for an exemption, but it must be through the City, and that
the Director of Community Development should be directed to
work with him in requesting that those be granted; that there
has not been any demonstration that benefit is in relationship
to the fee charged; that no public protest has been made against
allowing the exemptions; and that any payback to the State would
be on prorata basis according to his resources, and is not the
policy of the audit staff to require same.
Vic Greenlow, area E, stated that he installed a septic
tank/cesspool at a cost of $18,000 and was told his property
would not be served by sewers; and received an estimate of
$6-8,000 to connect, which creates a big disparity between the
average $2,900 assessment against $16,000 cost for the assessment
and connection; and that he was advised that Area E could not
have connected several years ago because of sewer plant capacity.
City Manager stated that there were about 5,000 unconnected
units in 1974, or 20%, and every effort was made to query owners
if they wanted to form assessment districts and connect the
sewer; that some areas did form districts, and in other areas,
there were not enough who said yes to form a district; that
the grant provided the ability to expand the plant to 6.56 mgpd
and was completed in 1979 and, without any growth, the units
which existed at that time could have been handled; that new
growth occurred and` connected to the sewers, and another expansion
became necessary, with capacity reached in 1980, and was completed
in 1983.
Ed Petty, Vista Drive, Area E, urged a six-month delay; that
a $5,000 loan for connection, at 12% interest, would mean $111 ,
046
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 4
1 . A.D. 143 (Continued)
plus the $34 per month for the assessment; and that there may
be other properties that may receive consideration by the State.
City Manager stated that it would take approximately six months
in which to resolve issues and create a new assessment district
for those areas proposed to be deleted from A.D. 143; that current
bids will not be valid and new bids will have to be obtained;
that a further two-week delay would preclude the ability to
award bids received; and that proceeding with any portion of
the district should commence immediately.
Robert Bertrand, Area F, questioned the meaning of "eliminate,
defer and exempt" ; and that in areas where there is an extreme
hardship, those should be exempted, both from an economical
and ecology standpoint; that there should not be any problem
with use of cesspools, and that there should be a study relative
to the impact on the atmosphere - an adequate EIR.
Don Lawson, 2696 Girasol , stated his understanding that exemption (56)
does not mean exemption from the district, but only from the
connection.
M. Goldberg, Area D, stated that most of the country is on septic
tanks, and that "dirty water" from the sewer plant will percolate
into the drinking water system; and the only reason for the
district is because the City cannot justify the cost of the
already expanded sewer plant.
In answer to question by John Milo, City Manager stated that
the intent of the plant expansion was to provide for new growth
and for that new growth to pay the debt for the expansion; that
the service charge is for the maintenance of the plant and not
payment of the debt for its expansion; that the $400 sewer
facility charge is included in the projections for the revenue
needed to fund the expansion; that revenues are ahead of
projections in terms of new growth for dlebt redemption. In
answer to question by Barbara Cannon, he staged that the existing
capacity of 10 mgpd is anticipated to serve growth for the next
ten years.
There were no further public comments. Following other hearings
on the published agenda, the Council continued its deliberation
on this matter, as follows:
In answer to question by Council , Engineer stated that for a
$3,000 assessment, additional costs could be estimated at $1 ,200
for connection and $400 for the Sewer Facility Fee, for an
estimated total of $4,600; that most of the units to be connected
were built since 1975, and have front-yard cesspools, and a
$5,000 connection would be rare.
City Manager stated that if Areas E, F, and I are removed,
approximately 1120 units remain in the district, of which
approximately 550 have covenants that sewers would not be
protested.
In answer to question by Council , Building $ Safety Director
stated that homes built in the 1940s had only cesspools, and
that there are about 100 of those in Area C.
Councilman Foster stated that this project has been agonized
over for months; that he can see the hardship and possibility
of total exemption in E-F-F -I-J because of the large rocks,
but the same condition does pnot exist in the other areas, and
recommended proceeding with the district, with those deletions.
0Ti
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 5
1 . A.D. 143 (Continued)
Councilman Smith stated that he supports proceeding; that the
$4,200 - $4,600 may be high for many people; that Areas A-B-C
at one time may not have been able to form districts, because
there were no main lines, but the City has spent a lot of money
to install those lines, and there have been so many connected
over the years, that there is a question of equity to those
who have already paid. (56)
In answer to question by Council , City Manager stated that the
issue of financial hardship will be returned to the Council
within 30 days.
Legal Counsel read title of Resolution 14938, ordering certain
changes and modifications to the Engineer' s Report, specifically,
the deletion of Areas E, F, Fp, I and J; after which, it was
moved by Foster, seconded by Maryanov, and unanimously carried,
that Resolution 14938 be adopted.
Legal Counsel read title of Resolution 14939, overruling and
denying protests (refers to remaining Areas A, B, C, D, G, and
H) ; after which, it was moved by Foster, seconded by Maryanov,
and unanimously carried, that Resolution 14939 be adopted.
Legal Counsel noted remaining Resolutions 14940, 14941 , 14942,
14943 and 14944, as presented with Agenda materials, relative
to finding and determining public interest, convenience and
necessity require the improvements, etc; providing for
contribution to pay certain costs and expenses ; confirming the
assessment, ordering the improvements; providing for the issuance
of bonds ; and calling for sealed bids on bonds to be issued;
after which, it was moved by Foster, seconded by Maryanov, and
unanimously carried, that Resolutions 14940 through 14944 be
adopted.
2. ROOM TAX INCREASE
On February 1 , 1984, Council continued consideration of increasing
Room Tax from 7% to 9%.
It was moved by Smith, seconded by Foster, and unanimously (14)
carried, that this matter be continued to March 7, 1984.
3. SIGN VARIANCE CASE 8.220 - THRIFTY DRUG
Consideration of appeal by Warren Heath & Co. , representing
Thrifty Drug, 366 S. Palm Canyon, from Planning Commission denial
of application for sign for south elevation. (131 )
It was moved by Foster, seconded by Maryanov, and unanimously
carried, that this matter be continued to March 7, 1984, at
request of appellant.
4. GPA 5.0253
Recommendation: That the Council approve revised Master Plan
of Drainage, including the addition of retention basis and new (101 )
areas not covered in the 1967 plan; and eliminate specific
cost/benefit ratio provisions.
It was moved by Maryanov, seconded by Foster, and unanimously
carried, that this matter be continued to March 7, 1984.
04
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 6
5. CASE 5.0252 (MISC) - REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
No action to be taken on public hearing notice published relative
to public comments on EIRs and redevelopment plans for two speci-
fied areas, i .e. , Oasis and North Palm Canyon. Each proposed
redevelopment area will be noticed for separate hearings.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION:
6. DE-ANNEXATION - 567 ACRES, SECTION 5, PALM HILLS
Consideration of request by Warren Coble to de-annex 567 acres
in a portion of Section 5, Palm Hills. (54)
It was moved by Smith, seconded by Foster, and unanimously
carried, that this matter be continued to March 7, 1984.
7. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION (Intro 1-18-84 & 2-1-84)
City Clerk read title of Ordinance 1215, relative to compensation (70)
for mayor and councilmembers; and
Ordinance 1216, relative to PERS contract amendment regarding (110)
Miscellaneous employees;
after which, it was moved by Faster, seconded by Smith, and
unanimously carried, that further readings be waived.
It was moved by Foster, seconded by Smith, and carried by the
following vote, that Ordinance 1215 be adopted:
AYES: Foster, Smith & Bogert
NO: Maryanov
ABSENT: None
It was moved by Foster, seconded by Smith, and unanimously
carried, that Ordinance 1216 be adopted.
8. A.D. 144 - STREET IMPROVEMENTS
On February 1 , 1984, Council continued actions on assessment
district proceedings relative to street improvement in portion
of Camino Parocela, between Calle Ajo and Calle Palo Fierro,
pending supplemental information relative to CDBG Funds. Director
of Community Development noted this matter was reviewed in detail
at the last study session.
(56)
Resolutions 14945 through 14947, regarding the proceedings,
including awarding contract to Kyser Construction Co. , in amount
of $71 ,992.50, and sale of bonds to Stone & 'Youngberg, at annual
interest rate of 8.25%, were presented; after which, it was
moved by Smith, seconded by Foster, and unanimously carried,
that Resolutions 14945 through 14947 be adopted; and that expendi-
ture of $43,000 from CDBG funds for this project be authorized.
8A. AIRPORT HOTEL SITE
Recommendation: That the Council grant a 6-month exclusive
right to negotiate a 5+ acre parcel of Airport Property located
between the south ramp terminal parking area and E1 Cielo Road,
for hotel development.
Economic Development & Housing Director stated that the developer (51 )
has agreed to cover the cast of the appraisal as a separate
cost item in addition to the deposit for the exclusive right;
and that there might be need for a separate appraisal by the
City at some point in the future.
Minute Order 3347 granting exclusive right, as recommended,
was presented; after which, it was moved by Foster, seconded
by Maryanov, and unanimously carried, that Minute Order 3347
be adopted, and that developer pay the cost of the appraisal .
Council Minutes (}
2-15-84 Page 7
CONSENT AGENDA:
9. Minute Order 3348 approving Change Order No. 1 to decrease contract
with U.S. Paving, re AIP-01 , by $99,904.61 . (51 )
10. Minute Order 3349 increasing maximum limit for AGR. 1977 for cogen-
eration legal services from $50,000 to $80,000 for Kadison, (52)
Pfaelzer, et al .
11 . Resolution 14948 approving Amendment #4 to Allocated Positions
& Compensation Plan to replace Street Mntce Worker I with Street (61 )
Mntce Worker II in General Operations; and replace a Clerk Typist
I with a Clerk Typist II for City Attorney.
12. Resolution 14949 approving Amendment #2 to AGR 1475 with TWA to
extend term to August 14, 1984; and increase landing fees. (51 )
13. Minute Order 3350 waiving formal bid and award contract to Brithanee
Electric in amount of $10,580.81 to repair waterwell motor and (92)
modernize control system for same.
14. Minute Order 3351 awarding purchase of a riding rotary mower to
Simplicity Mfg. , Inc. , in amount of $6,930.70. (84)
15. Resolution 14950 amending Comprehensive Fee Schedule to establish
Sewer Facility Fee per recreation vehicle space of $1 ,014. (114)
16. Resolutions 14951 and 14952 approving Payroll Warrants & Claims (86)
& Demands.
17. Resolution 14953 consenting , to joint public hearing with CRA on
March 21 , 1984, relative to PA5 - Oasis. (124)
18. Minute Order 3352 authorizing submission of a Housing Loan Program
application by Fredricks Development Corporation for the Sunrise (85)
Village Mobile Home Park, Section 35.
19. Resolution 14954 rescinding Res. 14812, which approved issuance
of Redevelopment Agency bonds ; subsequent action taken February (124)
1 , 1984.
It was moved by Smith, seconded by Foster, and unanimously carried,
that Resolutions 14948 through 14954 and Minute Orders 3348 through
3352 be adopted.
20. RACQUET CLUB/INDIAN AVENUE INTERSECTION - RECONSTRUCTION
Minute Order 3353, awarding contract to Allen Grading & Paving,
in amount of $13,443, to reconstruct above intersection, was presented; after which, it was moved by Maryanov, seconded by (129)
Foster, and unanimously carried, that Minute Order 3353 be
adopted.
21 . CONVENTION CENTER
Economic Development & Housing Director requested that the Council
RRP63�BrA siW't%aVeoA-eowfthenfWSjae e'bv�FviehvF AoMcin &RRY!99 (134)
with the Convention Center, which includes a positive description
of the project, capital cost estimates, headquarters hotel ,
public proforma, relation to the Temple golf course project,
and details of the development team. He stated that it does
not include precise information that would be used to seek
financing at a future date, when the project becomes more defined.
He recommended that the meeting be adjourned to February 21 ,
1984, to take action.
It was the consensus of the Council that dissemination of informa-
tion would be desirable.
Council Minutes
2-15-84 Page 8
21 . CONVENTION CENTER (Continued)
Councilman Maryanov suggested that the Council , as a whole, 1:134)
take a field trip to the proposed site.
REPORTS & REQUESTS:
22. DEPARTMENTAL - Received & Ordered Filed
a) Treasurer's Monthly - Oct, Nov, & Dec, 1983 1:121 )
b) CVB - 1st Quarterly 83-84 1:50)
23. CITY COUNCIL reports or requests
a) Councilman Smith requested that Council be provided with
additional information relative to off-road vehicle race
contemplated in the County area. Anticipation is there
will be 6-8 per year.
b) Councilman Foster requested that staff continue to monitor
the installation of wind energy towers being installed in
the County as to compliance with previous agreement.
24. STAFF reports or requests
a) City Manager requested that the Council adjourn to February
21 , 1984, to review the Convention Center item, and anticipate
need for adjourned meeting on March 14, 1984, at 7:30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor declared the meeting
adjourned to Tuesday, February 21 , 1984, at 12:30 p.m. , in the
Large Conference Room.
JUDITH SUMICH
City Clerk