Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 - MINUTES - 3/3/1993 4 '+505 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 3, 1993 A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, was called to order by Mayor Maryanov, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way, on Wednesday, March 3, 1993, at 7:30 P.in. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Hodges, Lyons, Reller-Spurgin, Schlendorf and Mayor Mayanov Absent: None The meeting was opened with the Salute to the Flag and an invocation by Father Daniel Roneau, St. Margaret's Episcopal Church REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: City Clerk reported that the agenda was posted in accordance with Council procedures on February 26, 1993. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Mayor declared the meeting adjourned 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 Schlendorf, seconded by Lyons, and unanimously carried, that the Minutes of February 3 and 17, 1993, be approved. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. AA 3.1154 - MYRNA OAYMAN APPEAL Consideration of appeal by Myma Oakman from Planning Comnrissioin denial of architectural approval for a single-family residence at 3035 Goldenrod Lane, R-1-B, Section 35. Director of Planning & Zoning reviewed his report, noting that the zoning allows single-family (111- development; that the issue relates to architectural approval; that the Council should look at the 001) compatibility of land use with existing development and whether the residence is appropriate in that context; that the Planning Commission recommended denial because of its concern about possible conflict with the specific plan for the Canyon Project. He displayed plans, noting that there is compliance with all setbacks and development standards; that it is a Mediterranean-Spanish style and complimentary to other projects in the neighborhood; and stated that two resolutions were provided for the Council, each making findings, i.e., one to uphold the Planning Commission and the other to overrule and grant the approval. Mayor declared the hearing opened. Myrna Oakman stated that before purchasing the lot, she contacted the City Manager because of a letter she received that permits would be issued in spite of the specific plan overlay; that based on the information she received, and two telephone conversations with the City Manager she purchased the lot, retained an architect, and paid the fees to seek approval to proceed; that she is ready to build and asked for approval of the plans. Greg Stepanicich, Attorney for Canyon Development, spoke in opposition to the appeal,and stated that they believe the decision was made in a marmer contrary to law, and if the appeal is sustained, it will violate the Specific Plan and General Plan, which provides for a hotel use, not residential; that he did not believe the R-1-13 applies because the zoning is required to be consistent with the General Plan; that the General Plan was established in July, 1991, and a reasonable period of time has been allowed,yet the zoning has not been changed; that he believes the General Plan would be the controlling action; that the application is for architectural approval, which he thinks is a discretionary action, and as such must be consistent with the General Plan land use plan; that he did not believe a permit would be consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, which also contemplates hotel use and be consistent with the General Plan and land use; that the staff report indicates M-15 land use, but the text of the proposed General Plan provides that the Specific Plan will control, which he has objected to in that it would create an inconsistency; that he believed the intent has always been to develop the property for hotel purposes; that the Canyon Development has spent over $37 million in preparation and trying to implement the plan; that it is committed to the plan and concerned that approval of the appeal might jeopardize its investment; and that if the appeal is sustained, Canyon Development will appeal to the Tribal Council. Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 2 1. AA 3.1154 (Continued) Mike Harris, Best, Best&Krieger, Attorney representing 28 Allottees and "PSL1147"successors to the former hotel land lease, who oppose the appeal and ask that it be denied. He stated his understanding that the Bureau of Indian Affairs also recommended denial, and explained the background of the hotel lease, which was cancelled in 1988 including all incomes that the Allottees had been receiving from it; that a 200-page new lease was approved last June with Solomon- Adler, that lease payments began, and that only remaining item was the amendment for the zoning to coincide with the Specific Plan, complete the Development & Disposition Agreement and Owner Participation Agreement; that it appeared the City had second thoughts last July and the project was in some jeopardy, at which point letters were sent by him.and the BIA and discussion resumed; that the City Manager's letter was sent indicating that the City was prepared to issue permits and was prepared to amend the Specific Plan; that the approval process seems to again not be moving along, and the project again seems to be in jeopardy; that the Oakman site leasehold needs to be acquired for the project as a key area to building the hotel, and if a permit is approved and it and others are not allowed to be acquired perhaps through eminent domain, the risk to the City is that Ms. Oakman may file inverse condemnation; that he felt the risk has already been made, and a line of credit is available w1 ich will alleviate the City's risk:, for which it need only agree to the use of eminent domain to acquire the leaseholds; that he felt the City must have known what impact the appeal would have on the Canyon project, the lessees, and that it was Indian land, yet there was no advanced word from the City to the Allottees,which he felt was not consistent with the City's agreement with the Tribal Council;that the City should take the minimal risk and honor the commitment to the developer and to the lessees who relied upon that commitment. Ms. Oakman stated that perhaps the Allottees should put a moratorium on the ground lease rent; that she has paid over$4,000 in five months in lease payments; that Mr. Solomon has defaulted on a number of escrows, and does not have the money to go ahead. Mr. Harris added that his clients have not received any of the money Ms. Oakman referred to, and maybe it is being held in the foreclosures. Paula Aiken, 2740 de Anza, stated that she owns Lot 3, TM16149, which has been tied up for two years with options and in escrow; that she sold it only to have to take it back because Mr. Solomon defaulted; that for the last three years, she has paid taxes and she should not be forced to suffer such losses; that the streets in the area are overgrown, and owners have not been able to sell the property; that she has been told that she can build,yet the City staff tells her that she cannot; and that she felt it was time to break the "strangle hold." Frank Wiskowski, 2347 Via Lazo, stated that he has an interest in a lot on Goldenrod, and questioned how long owners will have to wait to be able to develop; that he has paid the rent, and if Mr. Solomon wants to proceed, he should complete the escrows, Lake over the hotel site, and pass the rent to the Allottees; and that there are two other houses that;have been completed, and the developer will have to buy those. There were no further appearances, and the hearing was closed. Director of Planning& Zoning reported that the General Plan designation would allow up to 15- units per acre, that the zoning is R-2 which allows hotel use, and he felt the designation on the General Plan is appropriate and adequately shows the types of uses that would be planned under the General Plan scenario; that there are two homes that have been built in the Canyon Cove subdivision, out of 70 potential, several others have been talking with staff and have submitted applications for approval; and that he did not think the acquisition of one additional dwelling would appreciably change the Canyon project. In answer to questions by Council, he stated that the building moratorium was for two years, and expired April 20, 11192. City Attorney stated that there are existing homes, and the project included recognition that the developer would have to acquire houses, and the Oakman site would mean one more; that approval would not mean that the City was trying to kill or repeal the Specific Plan; that there have been intense negotiations with the developer, and the City is prepared to continue with those negotiations regardless of what happens with the Oakman appeal; that the City would like to make the project a reality;that there was a comment that there was little risk because of a developer line of credit, yet at all times there have been significant conditions attached to putting that line of credit forward; that in December, the Council urged that the developer come forth and buy the property, which would allow moving ahead without the threat of suit;; that he met with owners to try to explain the situation; that the City cannot agreed in advance to condemn property under certain circumstances, or when it would consider condemnation, or how; that these are Syo7 Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 3 1. AA 3.1154 (Continued) complicated issues and they have not been resolved; that regarding the Specific Plan issue, it does contemplate a hotel use, and the City was involved in a two-year moratorium during which the development of the project could proceed; that the City prevailed in litigation on the moratorium; that the moratorium expired in April, 1992, and there were questioned raised as to what the City was going to do; that on July 24 the City sent letters indicating that because of existing zoning, it would proceed to process building applications; that the City tried to reassure the property owners that the Canyon project was still seen as probably the best use of the property, but could not say that no building could happen until it was resolved; that there was a strong reaction from the Canyon Development, the Allottees and others; that the position has not changed, and the City has continued in its negotiations with the developer, never retracted its July letter, and Canyon Development was fully aware of this; that the City tried to get the developer to put up some of the money to take some of the time pressure off, and announced on December 16 that it would meet with the property owners, but as the negotiations continued, the City could not give the assurance that the owners wanted, and the meeting was delayed. He stated that the difficulty is there are people who have leases, paid rents, and have relied on the existing zoning and want to build; that refusal could lead to inverse condemnation action; that there are findings in the resolution which would have to be made to deny the appeal, which he read. He added that any appeal process through the Tribal Council is beyond the Council's control; that if the application is not processed, there will be an inconsistency with the position taken since July, 1992, and a message sent to the property owners that there is no development that they can make of their property; that if it is granted, a way still needs to be found to work with Canyon Development to overcome this problem and to take a positive view of the action. Councilmember Lyons stated that it was not true that the City had second thoughts in July; that he has been involved in the negotiations with the Mayor and the attorney for many hours trying to get the project into the City; that there have been frustrations, and the deal points keep increasing; that there has been too much time lapsed in this project; that he.feels the architectural approval could be resolve by Canyon Development purchasing the property that it needs now;that negotiations are continuing and he wants them to continue, but the Council has a moral obligation to the land holders also. Mayor emphasized that there were no second thoughts about the project; tbat the new Council asked for financial information, and once assessed, made it clear that it supported the project completely, and has worked hard to try to make it a reality; that the issue is not whether it is wanted, nor an issue with the Allottees,rather architectural approval on land the applicant has title to and the right to build something which conforms to the zoning. Councilmember Schlendorf stated that on the issue of architectural approval, the proposed project is very compatible with surrounding development. Resolution 18054, making findings, overruling Planning Commission, and granting the architectural approval, was presented; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Lyons, and unanimously carried, that R18054 be adopted. 2. CUP 5.0629 P.S. MORTUARY Planning Commission Recommendation: That the Council approve a conditional use permit, including filing of negative declaration, to allow installation of a crematory within existing mortuary building at 4707 E. Sunny Dunes, subject to conditions, M-1, Section 19. Director of Planning & Zoning reported the use permit is one which requires both Planning (07$_ Commission and Council approval; that the site is surrounded by industrial zoning, and the crematory will be within the existing building;that the Commission recommended approval by a 4-3 vote, although there were no reasons given foe the negative votes; and that there were no public comments at the Commission meeting. Mayor declared the hearing opened. John Flanagan, President of P.S. Mortuary, emphasized that the negative Commission votes were not explained, and asked for approval. There were no further appearances, and the hearing was dosed. Resolution 18055 as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Lyons, and unanimously carried, that R180SS be adopted. ()508 Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 4 3. TRACT 27663 -TENTATIVE MAP, MORR ANGELS JOINT VENTURE Planning Commission Recommendation: That the Council approve a tentative tract map for property on the NE comer of Amado Road and Hermosa Drive, including filing of negative declaration, in order to allow a 144-unit condominium project, R-4, (Section 14. Mayor stated that he would abstain due to a client relationship, and turned the gavel over to the (137) Mayor pro tem. Director of Planning& Zoning reported that the property is zoned R-4, and the addition will still leave the project under the allowable density; that there were 258 units in 1986 which were approved on the site; that the application before the Council is for the subdivision map, and the information concerning the project is for clarification; that the applicant met with the neighbors between January and February and made changes to the project; that; the Commission approved the project by a 6-1 vote, with the dissention due to concerns about the design element of the project proposed. He showed plans for the development of the units. Mayor declared the hearing opened; there were no appearances, and the hearing was closed. Resolution 18056 as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Lyons, and unanimously carried, that R113056 be adopted. 4. STREET VACATION - CAHUILLA ROAD Staff Recommendation: That the Council order the vacation of a portion of Cabuilla Road, between Ramon Road and Monte Vista, pursuant to request of property owners; said portion no longer needed for right-of--way. Director of Public Works highlighted his report. (145- Mayor declared the hearing opened; there were no appearances, and the hearing was closed. 001) Resolution 18057 as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Lyons, and unanimously carried, that R18057 be adopted. 5. STREET VACATION - MOUNTAIN VIEW Staff Recommendation: That the Council order the vacation of a portion of Mountain View Place, between N. Patencio Road and Via Monte Vista, pursuant to request of property owners; said portion no longer needed for right-of-way. Director of Public Works highlighted his report. (145- 001) Mayor declared the hearing opened; there were no appearances, and the hearing was closed. Resolution 18058 as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Lyons, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, and unanimously carried, that R18058 be adopted. PUBLIC COMMENTS: a) Comments re Item 6: John Weyser, Fey Norte, expressed opinion that Smith,Perani &Fox did a,good job on the EIR, but felt the Council should look carefully at the economic development statement; that he found errors in the table of contents(page numbering); that the Council (101- should be aware of the negative affects of growth on the environment, and that it will 008) reduce the attractiveness to the residents who live here, and the Council should consider Alternative 3 in the EIR. Mr. Lovekin read a letter dated March 3 from Amy Forbes, indicating preference to retaining a 1-2 per acre designation for Palm Hills;and he commended the Council and staff in its diligence in developing the General Plan update. John Gamlin,representing the L.ovekin Family, also thanked the Council for its patience through the General Plan update process, acknowledging a great amount of detail, and commended the staff as well; and added that the Lovekins look forward to working through the next logical step and implementation of the General Plan on their property. Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 5 Kay Tuttle, Manager Sunrise Racquet Club, stated opposition to the "floating dot" at Vista Chino and Sunrise, adding that the area is fighting graffiti, and a shopping center will increase security costs; and added that the Lucky Stores representative previously said it was willing to develop its center,and it should remain at that location,not expand across the street. Gann Carter, 2076 Sandalwood, representing many of the homeowners of Sagewood, opposed the floating dot, noting that there is a grocery store saturation now in the community, i.e., eight locations, of which some are vacant; that the Council needs to target business which the community needs, not take whatever comes along to the detriment of existing like businesses; that Lucky's is a 24-hour business, and an additional 24-hour business on the SE comer will diminish the value of property and quality of life style for the neighbors; that the floating dot allows an unfair decision to be made on a project; and that potential noise, odors and traffic will make life miserable for the residents in that area. Lee Forrest, Sagewood, opposed a change from professional development to commercial for Vista Chino and Sunrise; that it may look good on paper, but empty stores, e.g., Palm Canyon and Racquet Club, do not look good; that the empty buildings must be filled before more is added to take away from downtown, or detract from the life style; and that the floating dot bypasses the normal means of zoning. Dan Summers, representing the owner of the SE corner of Vista Chino and Sunrise Way, spoke in favor of the Commission recommendation,which he felt represented many hours of hard work; that those who implied they had not received notice, were in attendance at the Commission meetings; that the Conunission recommendation does not give any entitlement to the property, or to any other property, except that a CUP may be applied for; that he felt it offered an equal opportunity for all property owners; that the owner has filed a PDD application, for which they have a substantial interest by a prospective major tenant; that it will require both Commission and Council evaluation of each application on its own merit; that it does not preclude other sites, however, he felt the SE corner was the most logical for development, market potential, and residential growth,jobs, and for the community; and that they have submitted traffic, noise, and other studies with the application. Albert Chalked, stated that he owns 23 acres on the east side of the Airport, and would like to know what is planned under the proposed General Plan. c) Comments re Equestrian Center: Dee Dee Stone, 142 Eastlake suggested that the golf course be at the north entry area to Palm Springs. Mr. Terry Beard asked that the Council reconsider conflict between the Equestrian Center and the Golf Course, and commented on horses and rodeos and stated that taking away (109- equestrian center resources means less learning opportunities for children. 007) Nicole Cahill also commented on the equestrian center and the benefit of equine activities for her and for other children. Antonio Landos, stated she is taking lessons at the Equestrian Center, and wants to keep the stables available. Stacey Cahill stated that they collected over 4,000 signatures at the recent rodeo, in favor of keeping the equestrian center somewhere in Palm Springs. Mayor acknowledged persons in the audience who stood in favor of the equestrian center. Dick Schweitzer expressed appall that the Council would spend $14 million for a golf course and tear down the equestrian center, Bill McCuen, 3730 mesquite, commented on the number of equestrian centers in the area, adding that there are more places to play golf. Andre Money(?)stated that he has worked large properties in two states, commented on rodeos being an American tradition,and the Equestrian Center should not be eliminated. Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 6 Catherine Vincent, part-owner of the Equestrian Center, stated that$6 million is not too much to pay to refund the bond issue; and asked that time extension be granted to the Horse Foundation during which it may remain on the site, in order to finalize negotiations that are going on to invest in a new property, i.e., Indian-owned land in Palm Canyon; that they have an interested investor,as well as Child Help USA interested in promoting the equine and facilities in Palm Springs; that they received notice that they would not be at the same location,but only last year received) notice that they would not be at the new location, and asked that the allocation of funds that would have,been used to move them be used to move them to their new facility, wherever that may,be, and to save the improvements for their use at such location. Aloha V. Ole',Hawaii, stated that he was a tax attorney and accountant for 25 years, and has the time and interest to spend on children and horses„ and hence, his interest in investing in the Equestrian Center. He commented on his credentials in the thoroughbred racing/horse industry, ;and his tentative personal commitment to an alternative location for the equestrian center. Shirley Martin stated that the equestrian center is sacred, and consideration is owed to the wildlife and environment. Mayor stated that the. Council supports the equestrian center, and supports the rodeo which will go on as an annual event; that when the golf course bonds were; sold, $1.2 million was used to pay to vacate the equestrian center lease; that there was a commitment to the bond holders to repay the debt from golf course revenue; that $6 million would come out of the General Fund, and he did not believe the taxpayers would be agreeable to such a penalty; that the Council was left with no choice; that the Mesquite Avenue location was always a temporary location because the property was part of future percolation ponds for the wastewater treatment plant, and was too small; that the Council tried to find another location,but the Section 35 property had too much wind and sand, and the Council will do its best to make it happen; that he spoke with Tribal Chairman Milanovich,which may have increased the receptiveness of the request by the Horse Foundation; and that he hoped the project will happen. City Manager to meet with Ms. Vincent upon his return after March 9. Councilmember Schlendorf stated that she was involved in the equestrian center relocation before the golf course bonds were issued, and attempts to stop the golf course from proceeding; that she felt was imperative to bring the issue forward, but a small group negotiated to have some time at the Equestrian Center and negotiated a one-time deal to vacate when asked, and if they had to move temporarily, the City would pay the cost to permanently move the facility; that there should not:be any surprises; that such action stopped the remainder of the community from bringing the matter to a head before the bonds were sold; and that the Council cannot take$6 million of City money when it is trying to decide how to keep fire and police; that she was angry that the group waited to the last minute to look for an investor to build; that she felt it was very important to keep the rodeo; and that when an agreement is signed, they should keep their word. Councilmember Lyons stated that a$6 million penalty is not acceptable, and it would be irresponsible to throw it away; that he does not play golf, nor ride horses, and that a golf course at the north end of town does not make sense; that the debt service is fast approaching, and the Council must move ahead quickly to get revenues started; and that it is no longer a matter of choice. d) Other comments on matters not on the agenda: Frank Wiskowski,2347 Via Lazo, stated that he has paid thousands of dollars in permits and has not received priority treatment at the Building Department; that he has a set of plans submitted,which he has been told will not be approved, but he has built the same house and has sold it; and he did not need bureaucrats to tell him how to run his business. He stated that more rules are placed on builders each year for remodels,which result in work being done without permits. Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 7 Bill Byrne, 301 Overlook, suggested pursuing legislation that would mandate proof of payment of property tax prior to processing application for conditional use permits, noting that some developers have gone through the process, resulting in considerable staff time, only to find they have not paid the property taxes on the property they have secured permits. Fred Ebeling, Tuscan Road, expressed his pleasure at the Council's action on the Oakman appeal, expressed concern about the loss of the stables, questioned why the City could not refund the bond issue on the Golf Course, and his view that it might not be too much to pay for keeping Palm Springs little, not big city. George Goldberg,Box 4106,commented on the Mayor's abstentions when he was on the Council before. 6. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE Planning Commission Recommendation: That the Council review information regarding adoption of the General Plan update, and the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report(EIR); certify the EIR as complete and adopt Statement of Findings & Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program; and approve the General Plan. Public hearing closed on February 17. Director of Planning&Zoning reported that there have been meetings in the last two weeks, along with supplemental staff reports, and that the issues outstanding are: a) the floating dot at Vista Chino and Sunrise, for which options were reviewed at the study session February 23; b) Palm Hills, noting that new material was provided, which he believed met concerns of all interest groups,addressing the density issue; c)M-15 designation for the Canyon Project area, noting that (101- single-family in R-2 has been allowed for many years and is consistent with prior, and future 008 policies;d)resolution revised to provide background and findings relative to the former dump site; e) some of the language concerning downtown has been revised, reducing some of the strength of how active the City will be in working with property owners in pushing for commercial leasing and softened the city position and pulled away from enforcement of that, which still allows doing a lot without forcing the City into it; f) resolution changed in how to approach EIR or legal technicality appropriate for this type of activity; and g) received Tribal Council correspondence which were previously noted re Mesquite Avenue extension through Fairchilds, Palm Hills, and Barona Road extension. He stated that if the Council could have separate motions on parts of the plan, or it could approve the plan in its entirety, with exception on specific issues. Note: A lengthy discussion followed a motion by Schlendorf, seconded by Hodges, to approve the General Plan Update, with modification referred to as Option B for the shopping center designation at Vista Chino and Sunrise Way, placing the designation specifically on the NW comer. In-lieu of paraphrasing the comments, reference is made to a full transcript of the discussion, which is on file with the City Clerk, and is a matter of record concerning this item. Said motion was withdrawn, and upon advice from the City Attorney, the issue of the shopping center designation was separated from the main issue of the general plan update, to be resolved prior to voting on the plan, findings and EIR, in their entirety. Motion by Schlendorf to approve Option B, with the shopping center designation specified as the NW comer of Sunrise and Vista Chino initially failed to carry, and was subsequently reconsidered upon motion by Lyons, seconded by Reller-Spurgin; after which, the motion as originally stated was made again by Schlendorf, seconded by Hodges, and unanimously carried, thereby placing NCC on the NW comer of Sunrise and Vista Chino, and eliminating the shopping center designation"floating dot" from the intersection. Thereafter, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Hodges, and unanimously carried, that Resolution 18059, certifying the EIR as complete and adopting Statement of Findings and Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program, and approving the General Plan, including the shopping center designation on the NW corner of Vista Chino and Sunrise, be adopted. Council and staff thanked all parties involved in the general plan update, extending over the past several years. (l council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 8 7. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT- TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX Staff Recommendation: That the Council amend the Municipal Code, Chapter 3.24,to clarify that successor's liability applies to foreclosure sales. City Manager highlighted recommendation. (14(1- City Clerk read title of Ordinance, as follows: 00,)) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 3.24 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE TO CLARIFY PROVISIONS RELATING TO SUCCESSOR LIABILIITY FOR TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES. It was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, and unanimously carried, that further reading be waived, and that the Ordinance be introduced for first reading. 8. PSDRCVB - JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT&BYLAWS On February 17, 1993, the Council continued consideration of amendments to the JPA for the Palm Springs Desert Resorts CVB. City Manager reported that minor language changes and reordering were made to the amendments to make for easier reading relative to those things the Council had requested, and Item 3 will be further refined, but not with substantive changes, by the TAC, and once that is completed, the document would be distributed with the changes. Councilmember Schlendorf favored approval with language added that.the Council does not agree that the name of Palm Springs belongs to any other organization and that it does not agree that if it withdraws from the organization that it cannot take the name as well. She stated that in (05;2- approving the resolution for funding, such language should be included as a position of the 0013) Council, not a condition of approval. Mayor noted that the Council does not approve the marketing plan or the budget, and the major hotels will be asked to see if they want to continue with the .8% increase, and questioned what action the Council would take to reflect that position. City Attorney noted that a statement of intent in that regard could be added to the proposed resolution. Councilmember Hodges expressed disappointment that the Council was not taking an even stronger position in that regard; that she did not think any attention would be paid later if the City withdrew and wanted to take the name, and they would not give the; name up; that the Council should not approve a document that it does not entirely agree upon; that it relates to more than copyrights, that if the city pulled out, the Bureau would continue using the same name; that the City may never pull out and it may never be an issue, but anything; is possible; that the City's name is the only thing it offers as far as the tourist is concerned; and that tourists may not be aware when the name is used in publications that it may not be the real Palm Springs. Councilmember Lyons noted that the JPA is currently silent on that iissue. Councilmember Hodges added that the JPA has said it would not give up the name. Mayor stated that he did not think that was the case, and that rather it said the issue would be addressed if it ever came up; that there is a committee looking at the name of the Bureau, on which he serves; that when the issue to allow taking the name back went back for consideration, the Council sent along with it a number of other changes and the word "and" became a big issue; that the contention was made in return that Palm Springs had originally wanted its name included in the Bureau name when it was created, and now wanted to take it back; and that it is agreed that the name is very valuable, and Palm Springs is a member of it. Councilmember Schlendorf stated that she was satisfied with the resolution to the other issues which were of concern to her, and was willing to compromise, and felt her motion, achieved a compromise. Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 9 S. PSDRCVB (Continued) Resolution 19060 approving the amendments, subject to minor language and clerical corrections, and adding statement that City Council does not accept any assumption that if it leaves the JPA that it will not take with it the City's name, was presented; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, carried by the following vote, that R18060 be adopted: AYES: Lyons, Reller-Spurgin, Schlendorf E Maryanov NO: Hodges ABSENT: None ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE ITEMS: A. CDBG COUNTY/CITY SEPARATION AGREEMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Council approve a Separation Agreement with the County in order to transfer County pre-entitlement Community Development Block Grant funds in the amount of$147,116 to the City, and making the City directly responsible to HUD for expenditure (085- documentation - A3194. 001) City Manager reviewed the report of the Acting Director of Economic Development, noting that the County staff concurred in the recommendation, and responded to questions by Council, indicating that funds are programmed back into the CDBG Program, and any potential interest would be looked at after the approval is granted, as to merit in pursuing. Councilmember Reller-Spurgin asked that the staff report results at the next study session. Minute Order 5145 approving agreement as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Schlendorf, unanimously carried, that MO 5145 be adopted. B. AIRPORT ENGINEERING - CONTRACT AMENDMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Council approve Supplement No. 14 to Agr 2547 with Isbill (051- Associates for $58,678, to cover extra engineering for survey and serial photography of the new 021) runway requested by the FAA. City Manager highlighted the memorandum of the Director of Aviation,and responded to question by Council, indicating that the cost is within the original amount estimated for changes to the project. Minute Order 5146 as recommended, was presented; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, unanimously carried, that M05146 be adopted. CONSENT AGENDA: 9. MO 5147 awarding bid for contractual growing of spring and summer annual flowers to La Hacienda Nursery, at varying prices per flat, for an estimated total cost of$10,034.76, for the (084) Airport, Convention Center, Golf Course, Parks and Parkways for 1993 season. 10. Res 18061 approving third and final 12-month time extension for tentative tract map 23557 for seven-lot, single-family, residential subdivision on approximately 20 acres on the south side of (137- Camino Parocela, between Fern Canyon and Belardo, W-R-1-A, Section 22, to expire February 055) 2, 1994. It. MO 5148 awarding contract to J.D.C. Construction for$43,725.75 for a 22-space parking lot at (124- 365 N. Palm Canyon, CP92-42, (Community Redevelopment Agency owned property, formerly 004) Texaco Site), funded from 1991 Tax Allocation Bond proceeds, A3195. 12. MO 5149 approving agreement with the Sheriff and MO 5150 approving agreement with the (113- Califomia Highway Patrol to provide supplemental law enforcement services during Spring Break 001) 1993, for$62,275 and $4,255, respectively -A3196 and 3197. 14 Council Minutes 3-3-93 Page 10 13. Res 18062, 18063 and 18064 approving Payroll Warrants (2) and claim and demands. (086 It was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Schlendorf, and unanimously carried, that Resolutions 18061 through 18064 and Minute Orders 5147 through 5150 be adopted. ADDED STARTERS: REPORTS &REQUESTS: CITY COUNCIL reports or requests a) APPOINTMENTS: Mayor recommended that the Council confirm appointment of Councilmembers Lyons and Hodges to CVAG]Housing Comrtrittee,as representative and -- alternative, respectively, as a follow-up to direction noted at February 2, 1993, study r J session; after which, it was moved by Schlendorf, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, and unanimously carried, that said appointments be approved. b) Councilmember Schlendorf requested that the CVB quarterly reporting be brought to the Council in study session; and noted the deadline is approaching if the Council were to decide to give notice, and there are not many study sessions in which to review the issues. Mayor added that the joint meeting with the hotels affected by the .8% TOT increase also needs to be scheduled. Ms. Schlendorf asked that small hotels be included. c) Councilmember Reller-Spurgin asked about budget sessions; City Manager noted that he will be discussing scheduling at the next study session. d) Councilmember Lyons reported on the Valley-wide task force trip to Atlanta, in efforts to secure additional air service, noting the positive response from the Airlines as to the unified approach by the task force, and that Delta will continue its flights durough June, and possibly be looking at new routes. PUBLIC reports or requests - None STAFF reports or requests - None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor declared the meeting adjourned. J� UIDITH STJMICH City Clerk