Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-25-1992 City Council MinutesMINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 31315 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1992 ******************************************************************************* CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Washburn at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tem Dominguez. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALONGI, CHERVENY, DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER, WASHBURN ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Molendyk, Assistant City Manager Rogers, City Attorney Harper, Administrative Services Director Boone, Community Development Manager Shear, City Planner Christen, Community Services Director Watenpaugh, Public Services Director Tecca, Special Projects Coordinator Basham, Special Projects Coordinator Wood, City Treasurer Pape and City Clerk Kasad. PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS A. Proclamation _ Lake Elsinore Animal Friends. (F:18.3) Mayor Washburn advised that he and Councilman Alongi had participated in an event with L.E.A.F. on Saturday and this proclamation was presented during that event. He explained that the event focused on the number of animals euthanized each year and ended with a candlelight vigil. He stressed the responsibility of animal owners to reduce this number. Mayor Washburn commented on efforts in conjunction with the Water District to remove the odor caused by algae in the Lake and on fish clean-up efforts. PUBLIC COMMENTS _ AGENDIZED ITEMS Mayor Washburn advised that he had requests to address the following items of this agenda: Item Nos. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. 3. Received and ordered filed the Investment Reports for June 30, 1992 and July 31, 1992. (F:12.:) 5. Rejected and referred to Claims Administrato~~ the Claim submitted by Dwight Linger (CL #92-21). (F:52.2) 8. Approved Final Tract Map 26142, Accepted Dedications and authorized the PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 City Clerk to record documentation for Wesco Homes. (F:160.2) 9. Approved Public Hearing date of September 8, 1992, for the following: a. Specific Plan 91-1 and Environmental Impact Report 92-3 - Elsinore City Center (Oak Grove Equities). (F:150.2) ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes (F:44.4) Councilman Alongi requested that all tapes be retained by the City Clerk at least one year due to the sensitivity of issues being discussed. City Clerk Kasad clarified that generally these tapes are retained for at least two years. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AS PRESENTED. a. Joint City Council/Planning Commission Study Session - August 4, 1992. (f:44.4) b. Regular City Council Meeting - August 11, 1992. (F:44.4) MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS PRESENTED. c. Planning Commission Minutes - August 5, 1992. (f:60.3) 2. L.E.A.F. Animal Control Activitv Re~ort _ Julv. 1992. (F:18.2) Councilman Alongi reported that the number o~ animals turned in by owners and the number euthanized show large reductions on this report. He stated that he was pleased with these results. Councilwoman Cherveny advised the public that the pit bull recently found vicious by the City Council was destroyed because L.E.A.F. was not able to find a suitable home for the animal. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE ANIMAL CONTROL ACTIVITY REPORT FOR JULY, 1992. 4. Warrant Lists (F:12.3) d. July 31, 1992. Councilwoman Cherveny highlighted the Warrant Lists and indicated that the significant expenditures include payroll, Graham Avenue Construction $76,000, and $88,000 for Community Facilities District 88-3. b. August 14, 1992. Councilwoman Cherveny indicated that significant costs on this list included $80,000 issuance cost for Community Facilities District 88-3, $204,000 for CFD 88-3 project costs, and $172,000 for the Sheriff's Contract. 6. Chanae Order No. 4 for Graham Avenue Widenina Pro.iect = DBL Construction. Inc. (F:156.2) Councilman Alongi requested clarification with regard to a chain link fence and whether it was in the public right-of-way. Public Services Director Tecca advised that the fence was not on public property. Councilman Alongi also questioned the damage to a sewer line and whether it was in fact crushed. Public Services Director Tecca advised that the problem was really not in the contractor's work area, but it was necessary PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 to expose the problem ~o determine exactly what had happened. He further advised taht a 6" pipe was attached to a 4" Y, which was not the fault of this contractor. He stressed that the costs to the City were only to expose the problem and the Water District paid for the actual repairs. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0 WITH _ CHERVENY ABSTAINING TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER N0. 4 FOR THE GRAHAM AVENUE WIDENING PROJECT. Councilwoman Cherveny clarified that her abstention was based on the location of her business, 7. Notice of Comoletion for Imorovements of Graham Avenue = DBL Construction. Inc. (F:132.1)(X:156.2) Councilman Alongi suggested that it might be appropriate to have members of the Council Public Works Committee participate in the final inspection on projects such as this to allow for all questions to be answered. Public Services Director Tecca advised that the final punch list had been completed, however, he would be willing to walk thru with the public works committee members. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0 WLTH CHERVENY ABSTAINING TO ACCEPT THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Zone Code Amendment 92-1 (Amendment to Section 17.11. Central Business District Overlav and Establishment of the Central Business District Desi4n Standardsl _ Ordinance No. 936. (F:ll2.2) _ City Manager Molendyk highlighted this item and detailed the recommendations. The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. asking those persons interested in this item to speak. Hearing no one, the public hearing was closed at 7:18 p.m. Councilman Alongi suggested that Item No. 22 regarding Zone Code Amendment 92-2 and Ordinance No. 937 impact this item and Item No. 22 needs to be discussed before action can be taken on Item No. 21. City Attorney Harper explained that if Council so desires and since the public hearing on Item No. 21 has been closed this can be continued to allow for a decision on Item No. 22. Council concurred to hear Item No. 22. 22. Zone Code Amendment 92-2 (Revision of Title 17_ Section 17.94 _ Siqns = Advertisinp Structuresl and Ordinance No. 937. (F:172.2) The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. asking those persons interested in this matter to speak. The following person spoke: Leon Strigotte, 216 Chaney Street, questioned the exact location of the Overlay District. Staff provided a map of the Downtown Overlay District. City Attorney Harper clarified that the Overlay District is Item No. 21 and the public hearing on that item has been closed. He further clarified that this item addresses a redraft of the City Sign Ordinance and relates to the rules and regulations regarding signs and billboards throughout the City of Lake Elsinore. Mr. Harper advised that the previous public hearing which PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MYNUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 has been closed relates only to the Downtown Business District. Mr. Strigotte stated that Councilman Alongi owns a considerable amount of commercial property in the affected area and questioned Mr. Alongi's ability to discuss and vote on these items. Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 7:26 p.m. Councilman Alongi clarified that for an item to be a matter of conflict it must have an impact of $10,000 on his personal business. City Attorney Harper concurred. City Attorney Harper clarified that the only Sections affected by Item No. 22 is 17.94 and the Sections which are affected by the Downtown Area begin with 17.11. The are both in Chapter 17, but they do not overlap. Councilman Dominguez commented that existing signs that are in place will not be affected because they were in existence prior to this amendment and it will only affect the new permits or requests for changes to existing signs. Councilwoman Cherveny asked if anything that is currently in existence will be grandfathered in. Mayor Washburn explained that anything that is in existence prior to this ordinance will be considered existing non-conforming. City Attorney Harper exptained that one of the purposes of amending this section is to bringing it as close to compliance as the City can with the rapidly changing requirements of the Constitution. He further explained that as this ordinance stands it will withstand constitutional scrutiny as the law is stated today. Councilman Dominguez questioned the 90 day time period of 17.94.110 - Temporary Political Signs. City Attorney Harper explained that this is consistent with the Federal Court decisions in regard to a reasonable amount of time. Councilman Alongi questioned Section 17.94.080 - Removal of Obsolete Signs referring to the signs which were approved by the Design Review Committee. He further stated if a business moved out it might be wise to allow the signs to remain to have Main Street appear more occupied. Councilman Dominguez explained that the sign is the b~siness owners' responsibility and that every new business that comes in must have their sign approved by the Design Review Committee. City Attorney Harper reminded Council the the property owner is responsible for the removal of the sign should the tenant business owner choose not to. He also reminded Council that the sign ordinance does not pertain only to only the downtown area but rather the entire City. Councilman Alongi suggested that it is better to have a good looking sign on a building rather than no sign on a vacant building. He stated that if the sign is old and needs to be removed that he has no problem with abatement. Councilman Dominguez explained tfiat before a sign can go up the business owner must gain the permission of the property owner and the property owner is ultimately responsible. He further expla~ned that as soon as that business leaves, the owner of the business should remove the sign; if he does not then the property owner is responsible for the removal, and if neither does the the City has to remove it. Councilman Alongi stated that he is not discussing signs which are in need of replacement or removal from age or damage, but rather signs which have been approved by the ~esign Review Gommittee and should remain up until a PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 19~~2 new business moves in and mounts a new sign. Mayor Washburn stated that it should not be the City's responsibility to address new signs, but rather the property owners responsibility. He clarified with Councilman Alongi that his opinion is a sign is better than no sign. Community Development Manager Shear advised that in Ordinance No. 937 the section regarding Downtown Business District was deleted. He further advised that sign requirements which relate to Downtown Business District are found in Ordinance No. 936. City Attorney Harper clarified that in Ordinance No. 937 the regulations for off-site advertising and billboards apply City wide. There is no exclusion for the downtown area. MOVED BY CHERUENY, SECONDED BY WASHBURN TO ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 936: ORDINANCE N0. 936 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCII OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 17.11 AND ESTABLISHING A CENTRAL BUSINESS OVERLAY DISTRICT. UPON THE FOLLOWING ~OTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS CHERVENY, DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER, WASHBURN ALONGI NONE NONE 21. Zone Code Amendment 92-1 (Amendment to Section 17.11. Central Business District Overlav and Establishment of the Central Business District Desian Standardsl _ Ordinance No. 936. (Continued discussion) (F:172.2) City Manager Molendyk explained that Council might wish to consider changing 17.11.050 by adding a sentence at the end of the paragraph stating that the Committee is to be dissolved and the Planning Department to follow the plan set by the Design Review Standards. He further stated that this would go into effect January 1, 1993. Mr. Molendyk stated that this would give the DRC the opportunity to refine the Standards and policies used by the Planning Department. He further stated that this would give the applicant the ability to have an appeal process through the City Council at a later time. City Attorney Harper suggested that Council may wish to have further discussion, but that the item may need continuance due to the fact that the Ordinance contains several references to the Design Review Committee and he will need to review and revise the entire draft ordinance. Councilwoman Cherveny asked for clarification of 17.11.070 in regard to existing structure or signage not in compliance with the Design Standards. She also inquired whether this would allow existing situations to be grandfathered in. City Attorney Harper advised that it would not. Councilman Dominguez requested that "existing" be changed to "new" in Section 17.11.070 - Compliance with Standards "B", or grandfather any signage or non-confor~ance which was in place when the Design Review Committee was formed. City Attorney Harper stated that if the intent is not for existing PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 structures to be brought into conformance then paragraph "B" should be eliminated or the ordinance amended with a date specific. Councilman Alongi stated that he had some concern in regard to 17.11.060 "D" giving authority to the Design Review Committee for projects when they need to go to the Planning Commission. He further stated that there are several things which need inspection by the Building Department and to check that the items conform with the Codes. Councilman Alongi also questioned Section ll.11:060 in regard to uses. City Attorney Harper explained that the purpose of this Section was to enable the City to control the type and amount of usage. Councilman Alongi explained that 17.11.070 "A", "B" and "C" should be removed because there is no grandfather situation which can cause a hardship to persons who do not conform to the new standards. He further stated that he did not think that this was fair to the existing businesses. He also stated that this ordinance should be taken to a study session for rework to make it more fair to all concerned. Councilwoman Cherveny commented that the purpose of the ordinance is to bring everyone into compliance and end problem situations which have been in existence for a long time. Councilman Alongi stated that he is in agreement with Councilwoman Cherveny's opinion but still felt it was up to the property owner to seek low interest loans through the Redevelopment Agency and improve as their business allowed. He asked if the amount exceeds one thousand dollars if the City would abate the problem and kick the business out. He further questioned the purpose and action of the ordinance. City Attorney Harper explained that if the sign does not comply with the standards then as the ordinance is presently worded that will occur. The amendment suggested by Councilman Dominguez would change that to some degree. MOVED BY ALONGI AND FAILED FOR LACK Of A SECOND TO BRING THIS ITEM BACK AT A LATER DATE AFTER A STUDY SESSION. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she would like to see this issue resolved. Councilman Dominguez stated that he would like to see it brought to the date when the District was adopted and take the ordinance from that time on. City Attorney Harper stated that unless there were a category of signs placed after the guidelines, but without approval, then there is no issue. Therefore all those signs after the original date of compliance, would be in conformance then there is no problem and ~~hat section can be struck entirely. He further stated that if this is to address those who don't comply then the ordinance should stay the way it is. Councilman Winkler asked if there were any business owners who would need improvements over one thousand dollars. Councilman Alongi stated that no other ordinance goes backwards and this one shouldn't either. Councilwoman Cherveny asked if Section 17.11.070 could be struck in its entirety. City Attorney Harper explained that this could not be removed without losing the point of the ordinance. He also explained that the purpose for introducing this ordinance is that the previous Standards were guidelines and only guidelines with no enforcement mechanism. Mr. Harper further explained that the purpose of this ordinance is to set standards that can be enforced through the nuisance abatement procedure. PAGE SEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 Councilman Winkler explained that he approves of bringing things into compliance, including existing structures and he stated that he has concern for the hardship that can be caused to the business owner and suggested a longer time period to give the business owners the opportunity to comply. He also suggested that they could come back to Council if further time is needed due to hardship. Mayor Washburn suggested that the time frames go to one year for improvements under $1,000 and two years for improvements over $1,000. City Attorney Harper asked if it was the Council's intent to abolish of the Design Review Committee and possibly bring it back at a later date. He stated that this ordinance will have to be brought back because it is not possible to redraft the document at this time. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she could agree with the 1 year, 2 year compliance date as long as "C" is still in the ordinance. MOVED BY DOMINGUEZ, SECONDED BY CHERVENY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 936 WITH SECTION 17.11.070 "B" UNDER COMPLIANCE DATE TO READ (i) ONE (1) YEAR fROM THE DATE OF ADOPTION AND (ii) TWO (2) YEARS FROM THE DATE OF ADOPTION: ORDINANCE N0. 937 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 17.94 OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE. UPON THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS CHERVENY, DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER, WASHBURN ALONGI NONE NONE 23. North Peak Develonment Agreement = Ordinance No. 938. (F:68.1) The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. asking those persons interested in this item to speak. The following person spoke: Brian Meyers, TMC Development, representing the North Peak Planned Community, gave an overview of the project and explained that the purpose of this discussion is a Development Agreement for the project. He detailed the proposed agreement and explained that the main issue not resolved by the Planning Commission pertains to Fire Station Improvements. Mr. Meyers commented that this project is of benefit to the entire community and encouraged the City Council's approval of the agreement. City Attorney Harper advised that he was requested by Councilmembers Alongi and Winkler to review the potential for conflict. He further advised that his review indicates that Councilman Alongi's property is located far enough from the development and would not have any other ties with the project, which would be in conflict. He also advised that Councilman Winkler's property is closer to the project, however that does not necessarily indicate a conflict. He explained that it would be at the discretion of the Councilmembers as to whether the project will have a direct material financial effect creating a conflict. Helena Holman, residerot of Lake Elsinore, questioned how the determination is made as to how the Council will be affected financially to create a PAGE EIGHT - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 conflict. City Attorney Harper clarified that he doesn't determine the financial aspects, however neither Councilman has property in the Specific Plan or Agreement area, their property is in the general area. He further clarified the issue which the Fair PoliticaT Practices Commission would examine is whether or not the vote and the approval of the development plan will have a material financial effect on the value of the properties. He also clarified that the increase would have to be in excess of $10,000, however this impact is difficult to determine. He also clarified that this consideration addresses the development agreement document only. He advised that the ultimate decision with regard to conflict will rest on the individual Councilmembers. City Attorney Harper explained that Section 9.9 of the Development Agreement relating to the Highway 74 realignrr~ent, obligates the developer to particiapte in some future alignment, but does not obligate any other property owners to participate. Leon Strigotte, 216 Chaney Street, commented that the project has been approved, but the project will not function nor develop without the development agreement and therefore could create a conflict of interest for Council. Councilman Winkler advised that he would seek a written opinion from the Fair Political Practices Commission in regard to this matter. Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. City Planner Christen detailed the prior considerations of this project and the staff recommendations. Councilwoman Cherveny concurred with the Planning Commission recommendations and requested further discussion of the Fire Station commitment. She addressed page 9 of the agreement concerning school sites and the number of dwelling units going into the area. She stated that she felt there was an inadequate amount of acreage set aside for schools and questioned the need to provide a Junior High School in addition to the elementary schools. Mr. Meyers advised that the School District has established the type of schools and their locations, required of this development. Councilwoman Cherveny expressed concern with 2,000 homes being built in an area where there is no fire station close at hand. She indicated that she would like to see $50G,000 set aside for equipment for the fire station, as well as an addition to the fire station to accommodate community based policing efforts. She requested the addition of $100,000 for police department equipment or facilities. Councilwoman Cherveny addressed an item on page 12 of the Development Agreement which states that the "City will assist the developer by providing its fair share of affordab1e housing by providing excess to available set-aside funds". She explained that at this point it was her understanding that the Redevelopment Agency does not have a set aside fund and it has been taken care of through projec~s providing low income housing. Mr. Meyers explained that this is not a requirement that the City do this, but rather a provision which allows TMC to share in those set aside funds for affordable housing. Councilman Alongi requested that the Council recess to study this document and clarify what is affordable housing and what is low income housing. MOVED BY ALONGI AND FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO A STUDY SESSION. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she would'prefer to get through the document and complete this consideration. PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 Councilman Alongi expressed concern with Page 9(a) Phase I Park, because it sets a limit on grading and if it exceeds the limit set then it must come back to the Council for a decision. Mr. Meyers explained that there is a condition in which the developer must deliver the Park to the City in a dedicated fashion, within the 2% grade requirement, including appropriate drainage. Councilman Alongi questioned Section 4.1.4 - Park Sites. "D" (ii), regarding the nature parks. Mr. Meyers explained that this would be strictly park dedication and would be untouched at this time; with an allowance for development at a later date. Mayor Washburn inquired whether the basis for this item was fair market value and questioned the determination for credit. Community Services Director Watenpaugh explained that the developer had requested a 20% credit during the Specific Plan process for the entire 230 acres of open space. At that time the Council placed a condition that a 25 acre portion of that be maintained for public usage, however it will remain privately owned so the public won't pay for maintenance. He further explained that this condition in turn gives a 25 acre credit against the Quimby requirements for acreage to be used toward park improvements. Councilman Alongi inquired whether staff has seen the park sites. Community Services Director Watenpaugh advised that staff has been on site and seen the general area of the terrain and examined the topographical maps of the site and the landscape architect has reviewed the site to estimate the costs. Councilman Alongi questioned the density of Section 4.1.6 - Affordable Housing and asked for an interpretation of affordable housing. Mr. Meyers explained that this is a requirement set by the State based on the median incomes in the County. He further explained that this was adopted by the City in their Housing Element of the General Plan and this section of the agreement is intended to conform to the Housing Element of the General Plan. Councilman Alongi asked where the low and very low income units will be placed. Mayor Washburn explained that the City can choose where these units will be placed and that is based on the Housing Element and Specific Plan. Councilman Alongi stated that he would like to see this agreement based on four year periods so that if this Council is not sitting on Council in four years, the new Council has an input on the project that goes forward. City Attorney Harper stated that the section pertains to the City's ability to tell them when and how they have to phase the project. He further explained that it basically leaves up to the Developer how he is going to go through the business of developing it through phases. Mr. Harper further explained that Council will be seeing every tentative map of every phase come before Council for decision and Council can impose changes at that time. Councilman Alongi questioned the amount of money that will be involved in Section 9.5 - Financing of Public Facilities and/or Services. City Attorney Harper explained that the general policy followed by Council has always been that assessments cannot exceed 2% of the property value, the improvements cannot be in excess of a 3 to 1 lien to value ratio of construction of the property and designate the specific public improvements to be constructed with where the dollar will go: City Manager Molendyk explained that this project is not in a Redevelopment Agency area therefore there is no increment involved. Mayor Washburn questioned Section 6.1.3 - Grading, which provides the right to grade the property before the recording o~ the final map. He explained that his concern is waiting to do the grading in some proximity to the PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 market place for immediate future development and not grade because there are potential habitat concerns or mass grading and waiting for the market to open. Mr. Meyers stated that the purpose of that Section was to allow for a tentative map to proceed with a bulk grading plan which would allow for a head start for the infrastructures in Phase One. He also stated that Council will still have control of this, because Council will have to approve the bulk grading plan. Mayor Washburn explained that he concurred with the some of the concerns of Councilman Alongi and commended Planning Commission for their efforts. Councilwoman Cherveny asked if there are provisions for a bicycle lanes within the project. Mr. Meyers stated that there are provisions within the Specific Plan and within the conditions of the E.I.R. Mr. Meyers commented that the concerns regarding the fire Station at the Planning Commission level were the timing of the fire Station and the cost of the improvements and what would be allocated to the Fire Station. He stated that the earliest that a fire station can be provided is at the time of occupancy of phase three. City Manager Molendyk stated that what Councilwoman Cherveny is asking for is consideration of one additional room or two parking spaces for addition service provided. He further explained that this is not negotiation for fees, but rather the expansion of the building. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she would like to see something specifically addressed in the agreement concerning police. She further explained that she wants to see an amount specific in regard to the developers contribution for equipment for police. Mr. Meyers advised that police fees are called out for law enforcement in the E.I.R. and if it is the desire of the Coun~i} that TMC add to the cost of the Development Agreement then he would request a continuance to get back to his staff and his board of directors to decide what impact this would have on the project. Councilwoman Cherveny asked if Mr. Meyers concurred with the request for the fire station as Planning Commission stated it. He stated that he did but that it was a matter of how it is funded. Councilwoman Cherveny explained that this amount would be 1.5 million dollars for the fire. station and $100,000 for police. She further explained that this would mean an extra $600,000. Councilman Alongi advised that project creatrs no conflict in regard to his project and he further stated that he will vote on this item. THIS ITEM WAS HELD fOR LA'iER CONSIDERATION, TO ALLOW MR. MEYERS TO OBTAIN INPUT FROM HIS COMPANY. Mr. Meyers stated thai after discussion with his company representatives it was agreed that Council's request for an additional $600,000 for provisions for facilities and fire station was acceptable. He further reminded Council that there should be a revision to the language to require the facility to be delivered prior to occupancy of the first unit of phase three of the project. He further asked that since there is a provision for fire station improvements within the project that they get credit for any fire facilities fees, and that this $100,000 amount to be credited to any police facilities, not service fees but faci7ities fees. Councilwoman Cherveny suggested that the $100,000 not be called out for specific facilities due to the fact that only $50,000 may be needed for the facility and the other $50,000 could be used for a squad car. Mr. Myers concurred. MOVED BY CHERVENY, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ TO APPROVE STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCLUDE THAT THE TIMING Of THE FIRE PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, I992 STATION AND POLICE FACILITY WILL BE PRIOR TO THE OCCUPANCY OF THE FIRST UNIT OF THE THIRD PHASE OF THE PROJECT AND THE AGREEMENT AMENDED TO INCLUDE $100,000 FOR POLICE; AND APPROVE ORDINANCE N0. 938 UPON FIRST READING AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE N0. 938 AN ORDINANCE Of THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH NORTH PEAK PARTNERS. UPON THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BUSINESS ITEMS COUNCILMEMBERS COUNCILMEMBERS COUNCILMEMBERS: ALONGI, CHERVENY, DOMINGUEZ, WASHBURN NONE NONE WINKLER 31. Establishment of StOp Controlled Intersections - Hiah Street/Mill Street. Debra Drive/Cristina Court and Cristina Court/Michele Drive - Resolution No. 92-57. (F:162.2) - City Manager Molendyk highlighed the staff report. MOUED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION N0. 92-57. RESOLUTION N0. 92-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE LOCATION OF CERTAIN STOP INTERSECTIONS. 32. Convevance of Stephens Kangaroo Rat SKR Mitiaation Land directlv from Homestead land Devleooment to the Riverside Countv Habitat Conservation A enc RCHCA . (F:76.2) City Planner Christen explained this item. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE DIRECT CONVEYANCE OF T~E 560 ACRES OF SECTION 6, TSS, R5W FROM HOMESTEAD LAND DEVELOPMENT TO THE RI~ERSIDE COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION AGENCY AND AUTHORIZE THAT AGENCY TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE NECESSARY PROCEDURES TO COMPLETE THIS TRANSACTION. 33. Deferral of Planninq & Buildinp Deoartment Develooment Fees - J_P. Construction Co. (F:32.1) - Mayor Washburn stated that he is against this issue because it is in an area where the City is trying to upgrade and it would be an enhancement to bring this project on line. He further stated that this a simple assistance to give the developer to help clean up the area. Also, the money would eventually be recovered by a lien. Councilwoman Cherveny explained that she felt that the City should not set a precedence by changing or deferring fees. Councilman Alongi stated that due to the recession the City does need the money to operate and ~f we do it for one person we should do it for everyone. City Manager Molendyk explained that this item should also have be introduced to the Redevelopment Agency Board. Mayor Washburn explained that at E.D.C. this area was one of the areas that PAGE TWELVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 ~ was highlighted as most in need and until this time there has been no project to address the area. He further stated that this is a tool to assist and not a give away program. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR DEFERRAL OF DEVELOPMENT FEES. MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2 TO 3 WITH DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER AND WASHBURN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTES. Councilwoman Cherveny asked what the approprtate collateral wouTd be. Mayor Washburn explained that it would be a lien on the property. Councilman Alongi asked how long this lien would remain on the project before it is given back to the City. Mayor Washburn explained that the lien would be paid off when the developer pulls his permits. MOVED BY DOMINGUEZ, SECOND~D BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 1 WITH CHERVENY CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO DEFER THE DEVELOPMENT FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,932.00 WITH THE POSTING OF APPROPRIATE COLLATERAL THROUGH A LIEN TO BE PAID BACK TO CITY AT THE TIME THE BUILDING PERMIT IS PULLED. 34. S ecial Events Permit Process/Fee = Ordinance No. 934 and Resolution No. 92-58. (F:151.1) - City Manager Molendyk commented that because of recent court decisions he would request a continuance to a study session. MOVED BY CHERVENY, SECONDED BY ALONGI AND CARRIE~ BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO A STUDY SESSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSS30N. 35. Second Readinp - Ordinance No. 935 _ Relatina to Zone Chanae 91=7 = Mola Develo~ment. (F:172.2) MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED DY WASHBURN TO ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 935: ORDINANCE N0. 935 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, REZONING SIX ACREES FROM R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO M-1 (LIMITED MANUFACTURING) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF CHANEY AND MINTHORN STREETS (ZONE CHANGE 91-7 - CHANEY BUSINESS PARK); MOLA DEVELOPMENT. UPON THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBEP,S: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBEFS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALONGI, CHERVENY, DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER, WASHBURN NONE NONE NONE 36. Reauest for Waiver of Processin4 Fee for Activitv Permit at 31050 Riverside Drive 12 Sten House of Lake Elsinorel. (F:151.1) Mayor Washburn advise~ that he had a request to speak. MOVED BY ALONGI TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL THE ORDINANCE REGARDING SPECIAL EVENTS IS COMPLETED. City Attorney Harper commented on the special events permit process and related fees and insurance requirements. He clarified that this event has already occured and this is a reimbursement request. COUNCILMAN ALONGI WITHDREW HIS MOTION. MOVED BY ALONGI, SECONDED BY CHERVENY TO REFUND THE FEES AS REQUESTED. PAGE THIRTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 Shain Heygood, representing 12 Step House, aavised that these fees were paid up front to facilitate the event on short notice. She explained the work of this organization which deals with s~bstance abuse recovery. She further explained that they are currently looking for a new location and the reimbursement of funds would be greatly appreciated. Councilwoman Cherveny advised that she is familiar with the work of this organization and they are doing a good job. Mayor Washburn advised Ms. Heygood that the City does support a Human Services Center and suggested that adequate space might be available there Staff clarified that there was not adequate space. THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 TO 1 WITH WASHBURN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE AND DOMINGUEZ ABSTAINING TO REFUND THE FEES AS REQUESTED. 37. Downtown East Assessment District. (F:22.3) City Manager Molendyk gave an overview of the proposed district and the efforts which have been pursued thus far.' He indicated that BSI was contracted to study this situation and the report shows that the area between Prospect and Heald should be the first target area, to include up-grading of the sewer and water systems whi,ch are in poor condition, reconstruction of streets, curb, gutter and sidewalks and undergrounding of overhead utilities. Public Services Director Tecca explained that the improvements that are to be done behind City Hall are inclusive of the curbs and gutters, sidewalks and utilities that are compatible to this area. Dennis Klingelhofer, BSI, explained that in April of 1991, BSI was contracted to prepare a feasibility study to consider the formation of a benefit assessment district in an area which is known as the Downtown East Area to provide a source of funding for the reconstruction of infrastructure. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she would like to have a study session to give more consideration to the type if program that is being proposed. Councilman Alongi stated that he concurred wath Councilwoman Cherveny and would like to give the matter further consideration and see how it would affect other proposed projects in the City. Mayor Pro Tem Dominguez stated that he felt that the other utilities had already addressed the issue and that work should go forward. Councilman Winkler stoted that he felt that staff should proceed with the steps necessary to create an assessment district as this project has been in process for over a year and study sessions can be held at a later time as further consideration is needed. MOVED BY CHERVENY, SECONDED BY ALONGI AND FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2 to 3 WITH DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER AND WASHBURN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO A STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1992. Councilman Winkler expressed concern with th~ installation of traffic signals at Main and Sumner Streets and having the property owners pay for the traffic signals. Mr. Klingelhofer explained that the proposed action would be to instruct the City Attorney to begin the procedures for the formation process. F~rther information will have to come before the City Council to decide upon and traffic signals will be one of the issues. He further explained that an assessment report has not been prepared at this time, and that will be one of the things that will be brought to Council at a later time. Mayor Washburn explained that with the involvement of the Redevelopment PAGE FOURTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 Agency there may be some assistance available. Councilman Winkler stated that the second part of the staff recommendation should go under consideration of the Boardmembers of the Redevelopment Agency. MOVED BY WINKLER AND SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 1 WITH CHERVENY CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE STEPS NECESSARY TO CREATE AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE DEFINED AREA UNDER THE PROCEDURAL ACT AND THE 1915 BOND ISSUING ACT. 38. Amendment to Municipal Code relatina to the Kee°ina of Exotic Animals - Ordinance No. 933. (F:18.1) - City Manager Molendyk explained that this item has been before Council previously and has since been researched and reviewed through a Committee. Holly Spencer, 3700 Colonial Circle, thanked Council and Staff for their time and effort in reyard to this issue. She expressed her opposition to the portion of the ordinance which states that a persons must be allergic to common known houset,old pets, explaining that she has no such allergies. Tom Sofra, 35375 Tres Cerritos, Hemet, explained that he is a trainer and breeder of pot-bellied pigs and that a pot-bellied pig makes a good pet and is clean and intelligent. Micky Lane, 29300 Watson,Road, Romoland, spoke in favor of the pot-bellied pigs and further stated that 90 pounds is the maximum weight they will reach. Gary Narvaez, 35375 Tres Cerritos, Hemet, spoke in favor of pot-bellied pigs. Councilman Alongi asked how long Mr. Narvaez had been selling and breeding pigs in that area. Mr. Narvaez stated 2 years. Councilwoman Cherveny stated that she felt she had a good knowledge of what des~rebof~the 9~year oldhgirlrnotrwanting toaloose herlpetPpbut~thattshe had to look at what was right for the entire community. Councilman Alongi stated that the reason for the condition for allergies was to make it possible for persons to keep pot-bellied pigs as pets without opening the situation up to the whole community. His consideration is for the entire community and it is each person's right to live where they feel it will best address their lifestyles. He questioned the experience of the persons that have testified. Councilman Dominguez explained that there is an existing ordinance which prohibits the keeping of pigs, so therefore this new ordinance is to help address this issue. Councilman Winkler questioned the different areas of the ordinance which address restrictions. He explained that he felt that the allergic condition is unnecessary as the rest of the ordinance restricts the population of the pigs. Ann Washington, L.E.A.~. explained that she had reviewed the ordinance and that there has been very little problem at this time. She stated that unless the pig is harmed there would not be an excessive amount of noise. It was questioned how pot-bellied pigs are certified or registered to provide proof that thEy really are as stated. Mr. Narvaez stated that there is a national registry and all persons that purchase a pot-bellied pig receive proof of breeder and all recognized breeders are registered. Tom Spencer stated that their pig is registered. PAGE FIFTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 MOVED BY WINKLER SECONDED BY WASHBURN TO ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 933 WITH THE DELETION OF SECTION C.2.a.: ORDINANCE N0. 933 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE KEEPING OF EXOTIC ANIMALS. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: DOMINGUEZ, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ALONGI, CHERVENY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 39. Resolution Establishina Fees Soecific to Pot-Bellied Pias. (F:18.1) Mayor Washburn stated he felt that there was no need for staff input at this time. Mayor Washburn further stated that the fees listed in two columns represent L.E.A.F.'s suggestion for fees and the Committee's recommendation for fees. Tom Spencer objected to the license fee which he felt was far too high. Councilman Alongi explained that item No. 3 should be struck from the resolution as multiple pigs would not be allowed. He further explained the rest of the fines and fees which the Committee suggests. He stated that this is an exotic animal and the fee is according to its value. Mr. Spencer stated that the registration of $250.00 is not a fair amount in comparison with the cost of other animal license fees. He further stated that the other fines and fees more than make up for the costs which might be incurred by Animal Control. City Attorney Harper explained that the annual registration and license fees should reflect the costs associated with those activities, and this does cover additional staff time to provide service. Ann Washington explained that identification is vital as a permanent mark to provide service. She detailed the cost that will be incurred for identification and the special needs of the pigs. There was general discussion in regard to fees and fines in regard to other animals. MOVED BY CHERVENY AND SECONDED BY ALONGI AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 1 WITH WASHBURN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO ADOPT THE HIGHER FEE SCHEDULE, ELIMINATE ITEM N0. 3 AND ALTER ITEM N0. 7 TO READ $100.00 AND AUTHORIZE STAFF STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Holly Spencer expressed concern with the cost of registration because it is twice what she paid for her pig and she cannot afford the $250.00. Councilman Alongi offered to pay for Holly's pig's license. 40. Rodeo Committee Re uest. (F:108.17) Mayor Washburn highlighted this item and detailed the negotiation process to date. However, he explained that this agreement is not completely negotiated. Tom Hundshamer, President, Chamber of Commerce, thanked Mayor Washburn, Councilman Alongi and City Manager Molendyk for taking the time to help resolve the existing problems. He stressed the new opportunity for PAGE SIXTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 discussion and negotiation. He also invited the Council and the Community to the Mixer on August 26, 1992, at 5:30 p.m. at the Outlet Center. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 10:35 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 10:43 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS _ NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrpst Drive, City resident, commented that she is shocked with the City Council's lack of concern for small taxpayers. She stressed the request of her neighborhood for increasing the height of their block wall fence to eliminate some of the noise from Grand Avenue. She further commented on the traffic survey work which has been done and suggested that there are peak times which have not been addressed. She expressed concern with the use of B.S.I. consultants and the amount of projects they are involved in for the City. Peter Dawson, County resident, commented that the Southshore Homeowners Group is still requesting City support in obtaining their launching rights for the Lake. Frank Robie, 442 N. Kellogg Street, City resident, commented on Senior Citizens benefits and stressed the need to provide better recreation programs for Seniors and youths. He su'ggested skating rinks, bowling alleys, theaters, dances and Community swimming pools. He further suggested that the City assist Senior Citizens in contacting facilities for medical, dental, disability income assistance and dial-a-ride programs. Russell May, 110H Cleveland Court, City resident, advised that he owns property in the Amber Ridge Tract a~d commented on ongoing septic problems in that tract. He further commented that this problem has been going on for approximately seven years and requested that the City Council act to assist the homeowners. Councilwoman Cherveny advised Mr. May that the contract has been let to study the ability to use Redevelopment Agency funds in this situation. Councilman Winkler further advised that this study should be complete in about 30 days and clarified the need for appropriate findings. Laurie Tulstrup, City resident, commented on recent problems in the local Little League Organization. She stressed the need to resolve this situation and commented on threatening letters she has received. She hoped for a resolution to this situation so the children may continue to play. Edward Bend, 151 N. Pennsylvania, City resident, advised that he lives in the Amber Ridge tract and stressed the problems in this area. Councilwoman Cherveny stressed that the study is underway for the use of Redevelopment Agency funds. Councilman Winkler further clarified that this tract is adjacent to the Redevelopment Project Area and specific findings of benefit must exist for funding. Councilwomar Cherveny also stressed that she has not been in office for long at this point. Councilman Alongi commented that he would support appropriate funding. A1 Ewing, 114-1/2 Poe Street, City resident, commented on the City and the "revolution" underway. He further commented on the need for citizens to defend the City and work out the issues associated with the lake. He presented a jar of green water from the Lake and commented that it is time to clean up the Lake, neighborhoods and City. Leon Strigotte, 216 Chaney Street, City resident, responded to the comments of Mr. Ewing about the Lake and stressed the fact that the State has controled the Lake for the last 30 years. He also stressed that the State has built other lake facilities and done nothing to assist in maintaining Lake Elsinore. Ne further stressed that the Lake has not been the Council's responsibility. He also addressed the comments of Councilman Alongi at the last City Council Meeting, indicating that law enforcement had been increased annually during his term in office; parks inc7uding Yarborough, Swick & Matich, and Lakepoint were PAGE SEVENTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 built or improved and fees were collected from developers for the Lakeshore Bridge Improvements. Herlinda Alberti, representing Save Our Kids, County resident, commented on the efforts of SOK and their success to date. Lafayette Thompson, 33120 Stoneman, County resident, commented that he is a gang member and saw no future except for dealing drugs. He further commented on the support from SOK and advised taht he has been offered an apprenticeship. He thanked Herlinda Alberti for her concern and assistance. ' David Hopkins, 33120 Stoneman, County resident, further commented on the SOK program and its success to date. He encouraged the City to get involved in this effort. He invited interested persons to a~tend a meeting at the Community Center on September 4th. Art Chaskin, 18949 Grand Avenue, County resident, spoke in support of the SOK program. He stressed the efforts underway and the existing problems of the Community. He encouraged the Mayor to fight to save the rodeo for the Community. Herlinda Alberti, requeste~ Council assistance in finding a meeting location, because she is currently holding meetings in her home. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS None. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilwoman Cherveny commented on her opportunity to speak to the 6th grade class at Withrow Elementary and thanked them for an enjoyable experience. She further commented on her tour of the Eagle Mountain Landfill Site and recommended the tour to the rest of the Council. She also suggested taht the City Council lend support to this project. Councilwoman Cherveny questioned the Robb Road Traffic Signal and whether there were plans to name the street with one name instead of Grand/Robb/Lake. She requested that staff prov°de her with a response on this matter. Councilwoman Cherveny suggested that the Public Comments portion of the ineeting be moved back to the beginning of the meeting. Councilwoman Cherveny advised that she is pleased to see both sides Calking about the Rodeo as she has received several calls. Councilwoman Cherveny expressed concern that the funds have been •~~ithdrawn from the aeration project and hoped that the funds would still be available next year. Mayor Washburn clarified that this matter will be on the next LEMA agenda for discussion and could still proceed this year. Councilman Alongi commented that he also toured Eagle Mountain Landfill. He requested that staff ineet with the County regarding Grand Avenue to work out speed limits, as there have been three accidents there recently. Councilman Alongi also co~rroented that the Public Works Committee will be meeting the first Tuesday of each month at 9 a.m. starting September lst and encouraged public input. Councilman Alongi read a letter presented to him by Leon Strigotte and stressed Mr. Strigotte's insensitivity and candidacy for the Water Board. He also commented on Mr. Don Burnell and advised that he will continue to address this situation if necessary. He stressed his desire to serve the Community and his effort to decide what is best for the Community rather than what the political decision would be. He further stressed his ongoing effort to provide affordable housing for the Community. He suggested that Bill Starkey has refused to accept defeat and commented on the arrogance of Leon Strigotte as PAGE EIGHTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992 Mayor. He advised that he would aggressively work against any recall efforts against him. Mayor Pro Tem Dominguez advised that he may have a meeting place for SOK and requested that they contact him for more information. He also advised that he was again approached regarding the speed of traffic on Lakeshore Drive before the Middle School near the fishing area. He requested that staff review the possibility of a stop sign at Chaney/Lakeshore and report back. Councilman Winkler commented on the concerns with Little League and reminded the parents that the kids have had a good year and they should remember that these programs are for the kids. City Attorney Harper requested a Closed Session. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 11:35 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING W,aS RECONVENED AT 11:44 P.M. CLOSED SESSION THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO A JOINT CLOSED SESSION WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO DISCUSS A MATTER OF LITIGATION WITH O.M.G. AND A PERSONNEL MATTER AT 11:45 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 12:14 P.M. NO ACTION TAKEN. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY CHERVENY, SECONDED BY ALONGI AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 12:15 P.M. ~ ~ ~ ~1~~~- GARY M. WASHBURN, MAYOR CITY LAKE ELSINORE LERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE