Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-10-1990 City Council Minutes MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 545 CHANEY STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1990 - ****************************************************************** CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Washburn at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Winkler. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Molendyk, Assistant City Manager Rogers, City Attorney Harper, Administrative Services Director Wood, Community Development Director Gunderman, Community Services Director Watenpaugh, Public Services Director Kirchner and City Clerk Kasad. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Washburn advised that those parties interested in Item #34 would be permitted to speak at that time, as it is a public hearing. Leon Strigotte, 216 Chaney Street, expressed concern with the Council's support of the County-wide Park Assessment District issue. He commented on the assessments and fees already imposed on City residents and on upcoming increases. He suggested a better use of residents monies would be applied to assessments for increased and improved police and fire services. PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS None. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 2, 3, 8, 12 MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. 1. The following Minutes were approved: a. June 26, 1990 - Regular City Council Meeting. b. July 2, 1990 - Adjourned City Council Meeting. The following Minutes were received and ordered filed: c. June 20, 1990 - Lake Elsinore Planning Commission. f PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 4. Ratified Warrant List for June 29, 1990. 5. Rejected and referred to Claims Administrator the Claim submitted by Julie & Greg Wlodarczyk (CL #90-19). 6. Approved Agreement with Riverside County Road Department for Repair of Lakeshore Drive - wise Street to Dryden street, and authorized the Mayor to sign. 7. Accepted Right-of-Way Dedication for Ulla Lane, as offered in Parcel Maps 14777 and 7362 and authorized the city Clerk to have same recorded. -- 9. Accepted Grant Deeds for the purpose of street Right-of-Way Dedications as follow: single Family Residence at 408 Lewis Street for a 2.5 foot alley dedication. single Family Residence at 742 Mill Street for a 5 foot street dedication. single Family Residence at 911 pottery Street for a 2.5 foot alley dedication. single Family Residence at 911 pottery Street for a corner cutback dedication. single Family Residence at 1305 Sumner Avenue for a 2.5 foot alley dedication. and authorized to city Clerk to record said documents. 10. Approved Grant of Easement from city to EVMWD for Sewer Construction within Lot B of Tract 20705, and authorized the city Clerk to have recorded. -- 11. Accepted Grant Deeds for the Purpose of slope Easement Dedications as follow: 16801 Holborow Avenue for a 10' slope easement dedication. 16777 Holborow Avenue for a 10' slope easement dedication. 29590 Nichols Street for a 10' slope easement dedication. and authorized City Clerk to have same recorded. 13. Accepted Quitclaim Deeds for Water Rights on single Family Residences as follows: 321 Acacia street from Robert Hall Cook 4109 Crestview Drive from John & Phyllis Schulz 211 Davis street from Advent Builders, Inc. 313 Davis street from James L. & Deborah Anne Cantrell 16801 Holborow Avenue from Claude Bob & Sharon Delao 16777 Holborow Avenue from Roger & Karen Ritzdorf 408 Lewis street from Calvin Calister 742 Mill street from Joseph cornicelli & Kari Cooper -- 29590 Nichols Street from Glen & Betty Anne Burchfield 911 pottery street from Calvin Callister 312 Scrivener Street from Christopher Meece 1305 Sumner Avenue from Scot and Kristine Howard f PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 and authorized the City Clerk to have same recorded. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Code Enforcement Activity Report = June, 1990. Mayor Washburn commented on the increasing amount of trash re-appearing around town. He suggested adoption of an "800" number for residents to report the location of any trash which has been dumped. Councilman Winkler commented on last year's Trashbusters Program and its success. Mayor Washburn also commented on the need to clean-up some commercial parking lots on Main Street. MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY WINKLER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR JUNE, 1990. 3. Structure Abatement Activity Report June, 1990. Mayor Washburn commented on the necessity and success of this program and suggested the use of the "800" number for reporting of structure abatement related concerns. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE STRUCTURE ABATEMENT ACTIVITY REPORT FOR JUNE, 1990. 8. Acceptance of Riqht-of-Way Deed for Grand Avenue. Councilman Buck questioned the time line for the Robb Road/Lakeshore Drive intersection. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the plan for that intersection had been approved and efforts to acquire the necessary right-of-way are underway. He further advised that stuctura1 design work should begin in a couple of weeks. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY STARKEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ACCEPT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEEDS FOR GRAND AVENUE FROM THE LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. 12. Approval and Acceptance of Riqht-of-Way Dedication and Slope and Drainaqe Easement for Railroad Canyon Road. City Manager Mo1endyk suggested that video prepared by King Videocable relating to the Railroad Canyon Road Project be shown to update those councilmembers not present at the last meeting. The tape on Railroad Canyon Road was shown. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the videotape is for the most part still the most up to date information, however, the K-Rat permit has not yet been received. He suggested it might be received within the next two weeks. He further advised that in spite of this delay work on utilities, etc. are progressing. City Manager inquired whether there was someone the City could work with to expedite the permit. staff explained that they have contacted all of the appropriate sources to no avail. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ACCEPT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD CANYON ROAD. 1 PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PUBLIC HEARINGS MAYOR WASHBURN SUGGESTED THAT COUNCIL BEGIN WITH PUBLIC HEARING #32 AND HOLD HEARING #31 LAST. COUNCIL CONCURRED. 32. West Lake Elsinore Development Agreement. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE THE WEST LAKE ELSINORE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO JULY 24, 1990. 33. Conditional Use Permit 90-5 - Lake Elsinore Christian Fellowship. - MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-5 TO AUGUST 14, 1990. 34. Application for Additional Franchise - Jones Intercab1e of San Dieqo. City Attorney Harper detailed the purpose of the public hearing and the criteria to be considered in granting of an additional franchise. He detailed the materials presented to the city council previously and at the council table this evening. He also advised that three letters in support of King videocable had been received. The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests other than those detailed by the city Attorney. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. aSking those in favor of this item to speak. The following people spoke: Donnie Clarke, representing Jones Intercable, commented on the materials presented to council this evening and presented a petition to the city Clerk for inclusion in the record. He addressed each of the criteria detailed by the City Attorney as follows: - criteria 11 ~ Whether there will be siqnificant positive or neqative impacts on the community beinq served. Mr. Clarke quoted the Federal Communications commission Chairman saying, "competition between two cable operators not old style regulation will create cable t.v. responsiveness and innovation, fiber optic networks hold the promise of providing business and government with a better electronic highway. It can deliver more communication services and choices". He further commented on the need for competition to cause improved service. criteria ~ ~ Whether there will be an unreasonable adverse economic or aesthetic impact upon public or private property within the area. Mr. Clarke commented that there would be no adverse economic impact due to the construction because of the required bonds for this work. He also commented that the aesthetic impact would be very minimal because the majority would be aerial construction, and they would be willing to provide appropriate shrubbery to camoflauge the pedestals. criteria ~ = Whether there will be unreasonable disruption or inconvenience to existinq users, or any adverse effect on future use, or utility poles, public easements, and the public - ; PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 riqhts-of-way contrary to the intent of Section 767.5 of the Public utilities Code. Mr. Clarke advised that Jones Intercable had commissioned an independent study of the local plant; which found that in terms of available space for an additional cable television operator, less than 1% of the existing Edison and General Telephone poles would have any space problems, and further that in those problem areas the construction could easily be directed underground. Mr. Clarke further advised that with regard to disruption to existing users the engineering study shows that with proper care no disruption would be necessary during the construction of their system at all. As to disruption of traffic flow, again according to the study the majority of the underground areas are residential in nature and are away from the main throughways. Any disruption to automobile or pedestrian traffic flow in the busy commercial districts would be very minimal and he added that they would do construction at times when the traffic flow was the minimum. Even at night within the safety limitations. Criteria!! = Whether the franchise applicant has the technical and financial ability to perform. Mr. Clarke advised that Jones Intercable is the 9th largest cable operator in the Country,operating in 20 states and doing business since 1968. He also advised that they currently service 1.4 million subscribers and serve communities such as Oxnard, Walnut Valley, Lakewood, Palmdale, Lancaster, Industry City and San Diego, He stressed that their business is Cable Television and they are in no other side business, and detailed corporate statistics and new communities being pursued for franchises. the system unless someone would like some elaboration on it but He commented that he thinks it is clear that Jones has the qualifications both technical and financial to deliver and perform according to what is required. criteria 12 = Whether there is any impact on the franchisinq authority's interest in havinq universal cable service. Mr. Clarke advised that they had originally applied for a limited franchise for the new development areas, however the City had advised that under the existing ordinance, service to all residents would be required, and they are now willing to construct their plant to serve the entire city. He also commented on their ability to serve areas which have not previously been served. criteria !Q = Whether other societal interests qenerally considered &y franchising authorities will be met. Mr. Clarke commented that they are proud of their corporate citizenship in the communities they serve and are more than willing for the Council to check their references in other communities. He detailed their involvement in public education and the Mind Extension University. He also detailed Galactic Radio. He also commented on their support of non-profit organizations, particularly the Special Olympics for which they have raised over one million dollars nationwide. criteria iZ = Whether the operation of an additional cable f PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 television system in the community is economicallY feasible. Mr. Clarke advised that according to their financial analysis, their operation in Lake Elsinore would be very feasible. He further advised that they would be spreading their management in Riverside County to cover all markets. He commented that due to the tremendous growth in this area, direct competition is very viable. criteria ~ = Such other additional matters, both procedural and substantive, as the franchisinq authority may determine to be relevant. -- Mr. Clarke commented that they realize the city Council has a difficult decision, however he assured council that had the people of Lake Elsinore not been interested in an additional cable operator they probably would not be requesting the franchise. He reminded Council of the independent surveys taken in the Community and the telemarketing efforts undertaken. He summarized that they feel they can be a major asset to the community and look forward to working with the city council to build the city. Mayor Washburn requested other persons in favor of this franchise to speak, the following persons requested the option to answer questions on behalf of Jones Intercable later in the hearing: Mr. Ben Blackman Charles Gill Gary McDonald Albert McArthur, 226 E. Peck street, advised that he had obtained 110 signature in favor of a second cable company, and detailed his discussions with the people he contacted. He suggested that second company might provide more sports channels, and supported the application for a second -- franchise. Mayor Washburn advised that requests to speak had been received supporting King videocable. city Attorney Harper clarified that the issue is not whether people are in favor of King Videocable or not; the issue is whether or not there should be an additional franchise. Mayor Washburn requested those who wished to comment on the franchise application to speak. The following people spoke: Bill Moran, 939 Barbara Way, advised that he has been a King subscriber for seven years and while he has always been opposed to monopolies and unfair business advantages, he feels that is not the case here. He commented that they have served the area for fifteen years, installed the cable, dug the ditches and offered public broadcasting. He commented on their willingness to broadcast the parades, assist the Chamber of Commerce and the City. He expressed concern with having his front lawn dug up and a pedestal put in, as his is currently underground. George Alongi, 649 Mill street, commented on the early competition in the City between markets and the current selection. He commented that the issue is not whether King video provides good service or not, but the issue of providing a selection to the community. He expressed concern with refusing a company the right to serve the community. .... Vick Knight; 132 West Graham Avenue, advised that he and his f PAGE SEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 family have been fans of King Video for nine years and that he is very impressed with the community programming that they have provided. He detailed the civic events, parades, educational activities, community forums, telethon and meetings which King Video covers. He advised that this is only the second community in the State where the local cable system has put on a united Way Telethon, and that he is pleased with the recognition the Community has given King Video with the Pac Man Award. He summarized by objecting to the request for an additional franchise. Pete Vanderhagen, resident of Canyon Lake, advised that he represents a former Board of Director and member of the Canyon Lake p.a.A., as such he commented on the credibility problem which existed in Canyon Lake a few years ago and King Video's efforts to increase communication, improve service and get the problems resolved. Mr. Vanderhagen also advised that he is an educator and has been involved in instructional television for 20 years working with PBS Stations, cable companies and broadcasters around the country; he also detailed the educational programming which has been offered by King Video in the past. He concluded by commenting on the commitment of King Video to the Community and their willingness to experiment and try new channels of information and be a good corporate citizen. Sonja Wilson, 21330 Waite Street at present and 30402 Jernigan Street previously, commented that she has subscribed to King videocable since it first came to the valley having been a resident for twenty-four years. She commented on the variety of channels, good service, and good quality. She detailed a recent problem which required re-wiring of her connection to the system. She commented on the public forums, telethon and other community services; and on the unprejudicial hiring and service practices of King Video. She concluded that King Videocable has done a good job and provides service to the entire community. Sara Coleman, 21009 Grand Avenue, Wildomar, advised that she was speaking as a private citizen and a non-subscriber to cable television. She advised that while she believes in private enterprise and equal opportunities she also believes that necessitates equal responsibility. She also advised that she undertook a survey of her own with very different results from those portrayed and commented that a survey is only as effective as the questions asked. Her questions found that most people are very satisfied with the existing level of service. She commented that she is proud of the existing company and its service and dedication to community and suggested that only one franchise be maintained. Alan Baldwin, 16496 Lash, commented that he has been in Lake Elsinore since 1968 and in his experience King Video has never said no to anything. He further commented that they have pushed the Community to increase their use of the cable system for public programs, including anything that could create community involvement and community access. He commented that only bad could come from a new franchise opportunity for a new operator in that it would be very difficult to keep the present system economical. Steve Brown, Brookstone Development, commented that in their 15 years of experience in this community building homes and shopping centers, King Video has been a part of their growth supplying cable services to most of their units. He further commented it would be nuisance to have two pedestals coming up in front of all of the homes because they are always working f PAGE EIGHT - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 to cover up utilities for aesthetic reasons. He expressed concern that another franchise couldn't help but cut into King video's profit structure and the city would come up on the short end of the stick. Norm Nichols, 32385 Macy Street, advised that he has been in Lake Elsinore for sixteen years and his level of service has not been as good as the comments preceding his, and commented that in thirteen years of cable service he has had "watchable" cable 50% of the time. He expressed concern that King Video has been the only cable service available during that time. He commented that he must not be the only one with problems considering the number of repair trucks around town. He finally commented that he would like to see another cable company whether it is Jones or someone else. - Karen Snyder, 150 N. pennsylvania st, Lake Elsinore, commented that she has been a customer of King videocable for eight years and is a very satisfied customer. She further commented on being contacted by Jones Intercable and the manner in which they asked questions relating to double the channels for the same rate. She expressed her support of King Video for their willingness to grow and work with the community and employ many of the local residents. She also expressed her confusion with Jones Intercable's original request to provide cable in the new development areas and their new proposal to provide it to the entire city. Tom Thomas, Vice President and General Manager of King videocable, 556 Birch Street, Lake Elsinore, commented on his pride in this community and its residents, and with being the second General Manager of King in the sixteen years they have been in the city. He stressed King videocable concern with continuity in its service and its employees, and detailed the years of service of many of them. He detailed the programs they have covered and provided for the past sixteen years and showed a videotape further detailing the projects in which they have become involved. - Ed Houston, President, King videocable, 333 Dexter Avenue North, Seattle, washington, advised council that they are a solely owned subsidiary of King Broadcasting company. He detailed the annual gross revenues of King video and Jones Intercable and compared assets and holdings and contributions of the two companies. Barry Johnson, 17380 Lakeshore Drive, commented on his difficulty in being connected to the King Videocable system when he moved here. He detailed his attempts over approximately one and one half months time. He also commented that they are under staffed and not able to hire additional personnel. He finally commented that he definitely felt another franchise should be granted. Ben Blackman, General Manager for Jones Intercable Operations in Southern California, commented that while he is impressed with Mr. Thomas, he felt the issue was to grant a franchise to Jones Intercable. He requested that the discussion get back on track. He further commented that good service is not the question, but Jones Intercable is interested in a franchise in the community of Lake Elsinore. - Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 8:37 p.m. and requested comments from staff. city Attorney Harper reminded Council that in addition to the public testimony there were formal written presentations from 1 PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 ..... I Jones Intercable and King Videocable. Councilman Winkler requested that City Attorney Harper clarify criteria number seven with regard to economic feasibility. He inquired whether this meant whether or not we could support two cable systems or whether or not it is feasible for Jones. City Attorney Harper advised that he would interpret the language to mean whether or not it was economically feasible for the Community, as opposed to the other cable provider. Councilman Winkler addressed criteria number one and six. He commented that one of the last comments was that this did not address whether King video was a good business and community service, but whether a new franchise would have a possible adverse economic impact on King; if it does adversely affect King, some of the community services provided could be reduced. He felt this might have an effect on number one and six. City Attorney Harper commented that in the sense it was stated, it would be less an evaluation of King video and more whether or not the type of service the community is presently receiving would continue with the impact of an addition franchise. Councilman Winkler commented from that standpoint he has concerns with criteria one and six. He also commented on the services provided by King Videocable that are beyond the requirements of their franchise and their involvements in the community. He expressed concern with the construction required for the additional system and its impact on the community and its residents. He commented that with the current rate of growth the residents are subject to construction constantly and any increase would impact the community. Councilman Dominguez advised that he was here when King Video first came to the valley and they have consistently provided good services to the community and worked to get the local residents involved. He expressed concern with the potential of shortened profits and shortened services. Councilman Starkey inquired of Mr. Clarke why his company had just recently become interested in the City of Lake Elsinore. Mr. Clarke advised that they are just now getting interested in Lake Elsinore and Western Riverside County because of the current growth in the area. He also advised that they have an ongoing search throughout the Country for new business opportunities. ...... , Councilman Starkey also inquired how Jones Intercable could offer between 70 and 80 channels here when they do not provide that many channels in any of the other cities they serve. Mr. Clarke questioned which cities were meant by this questions. Councilman Starkey suggested San Diego or Lancaster as an example. Mr. Clarke advised that in San Diego they provide the same type of service they would supply to Riverside County, which is a five hundred and fifty megahertz system and with eighty channel capacity. Mr. Clarke further advised that they would initially program fifty-four here with potential for seventy seven channels. Councilman Starkey detailed the type of community service provided by King Video and questioned an example of the type of community service Jones provides to the City of San Jacinto. Amy Vaninstill, representing Jones Intercable, advised that they support the San Jacinto Potato Festival. f PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 She explained that in San Jacinto they have just begun buidling the system and currently service approximately 300 subscribers. She further explained that they support the Potato Festival financially, and the San Jacinto Business Association annual Christmas party for disadvantaged youth. She commented on the limitations in their ability to contribute to charities when their subscription level is just beginning to build up. She commented on the Special Olympics efforts Jones Intercable is involved in. Mr. Clarke commented on the disadvantage of not having been able to show the city it's work. He also commented on community involvement award received by Jones Intercable. Mayor Washburn questioned a copy of the Jones Intercable 1989 annual report that shows a loss of twenty-four million dollars, and that the company only owns 43% of the company assets. Mr. Clarke had no information on this document. - Councilman Buck questioned the proposed service level and the costs presented, specifically how they could provide the same level of service afforded San Diego at a cost $17.95, when the quote here is $14.50 per month. Mr. Clarke explained that this figure is based on the market for the area; and further clarified that this area is a very competitive market for cable services. councilman Buck inquired, as professionals in the cable field, how many companies they feel Lake Elsinore can support. Mr. Clarke indicated he did not know. Councilman Buck further questioned the company's willingness to provide the level of community services offered by King Videocable. Mr. Clarke advised that they are not only willing to offer that, but considerably more channels and services. Councilman Buck expressed concern with the possibility of a "price war" causing the level of service to drop because the companies cannot provide what we currently have. Mr. Clarke suggested that the community would welcome a price war. -' Mayor Washburn questioned Jones Intercable's license to install cable. Mr. Clarke confirmed that they are licensed. Mayor Washburn further questioned some of the statistics relating to the ability to support another system. Mr. Clarke also reiterated his information based on locally conducted services. Councilman Starkey asked if the franchise were to be granted, where would Jones begin installation. Mr. Clarke suggested that it would be parallel in the existing areas and the new areas. councilman Starkey further questioned their willingness to provide service in the downtown area. Mr. Clarke confirmed that they would cover this area. MOVED BY WINKLER TO DENY THE APPLICATION. city Attorney Harper requested that Council's motion include specific findings to support the motion. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY BUCK AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DENY THE APPLICATION BASED ON CRITERIA ONE, TWO, SIX, SEVEN AND EIGHT. - 35. Surface Mininq and Reclamation Ordinance. Ordinance No. 897. Community Development Director Gunderman detailed the purpose f PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 of this Ordinance and the necessary review process. .... The City Clerk reported no written comments or protests. Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 9:07 p.m. asking those in favor of this ordinance to speak. No one spoke. Mayor Washburn asked those in opposition to speak. Hearing no one the public hearing was closed at 9:07 p.m. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY STARKEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 897: ORDINANCE NO. 897 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE IMPLEMENTING THE SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1975. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 9:15 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:20 P.M. 31. Northwest Sewer proiect Assessment District 86-1. Resolution.Nos. 90-32 thru 90-39. city Attorney Harper explained the prior consideration of this item and the continuance of the public hearing to allow for redesign and bid of the project. He advised that changes in design were made and new bids have been received. Public Services Director Kirchner advised that the bids were approximately $1 million less than the first bids. He explained that the sewer line work low bidder was MBC Constructors and the pump station low bidder was Colich & Sons. He also detailed recommended deletions or 0 assessments. The City Clerk reported that two written comments were received requesting deletion of Zone 2 from the district from Lawrence cartier and Dennis Spar (Dura construction). Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing at 9:26 p.m. asking those in favor of Assessment District 86-1 to speak. The following people spoke: Fred Crowe, Butterfield Engineering, the Keith Companies, 565 Chaney Street, advised that he is in favor of the proposed district and stressed the necessity of its improvements. He advised that he had received a letter from Len Vierra of Rancon and detailed the concerns of that letter, but commented the existing report would appear to be acceptable. City Attorney Harper clarified the current proposed benefit spread. Dennis Spar, Dura Construction, concurred with staff's recommendation for removal of Zone 2 from the District, and 1 PAGE TWELVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 questioned the pay back for that area. City Attorney Harper explained the reimbursement requirements and stressed that the final costs would not be locked in by this approach. Mr. Spar further commented on his understanding of the reimbursement with the water district. Neil Cleveland, 28465 Front Street, Temecula, explained the promise for reimbursement of costs he and another developer had incurred in the placement of the existing sewer lines. He expressed concern that those property owners were now requesting to be deleted from the district and essentially not paying for the improvements they originally agreed to participate in. - Steve Brown, Brookstone Development, further voiced the concerns expressed by Mr. Cleveland. He also commended staff for their work in obtaining the re-bid. Jonathan Friedman, Long Beach Equities, requested clarification of the sewer main refund figure, which had not changed with the rebid process. Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing at 9:44 p.m. Steve Hassett, NBS Lowrey, Project Engineers explained that the cost questioned by Mr. Friedman had not yet been re-adjusted, but would be a reduced figure. councilman Dominguez questioned the parcel owned by E.Z. Products and what the recommendation would be. City Attorney Harper advised that the engineer's report had included assessment on this property in that it will receive benefit, even though they have a septic system. Council discussion relating to original conditions of approval of E.Z. Products and the benefit from this district. - Mayor Washburn expressed concern with Zone 2 being dropped from the District. Councilman Buck advised that due to the information provided by Mr. Cleveland, he no longer would support the deletion of Zone 2. After Council discussion, it was decided that Zone 2 should be left in and City Attorney Harper recommended adoption of the proposed resolutions with adoption of Resolution No. 90-36 subject to respreading of assessments pursuant to modified engineer's report. MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NOS. 90-32 THRU 90-39; WITH RESOLUTION NO. 90-36 ADOPTED SUBJECT TO RESPREADING OF ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE MODIFIED ENGINEER'S REPORT: RESOLUTION NO. 90-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING CERTAIN CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE ENGINEER'S "REPORT" IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-33 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, OVERRULING AND DENYING PROTESTS AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. J PAGE THIRTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. 90-34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND PROVIDING FOR CONTRIBUTION TO PAY CERTAIN COSTS AND EXPENSES IN AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-35 ..... A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AGREEMENTS. RESOLUTION NO. 90-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT, ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS BY CITY FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 90-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. RESOLUTION NO. 90-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBING A CERTAIN PROJECT; MAKING A STATEMENT OF THE PUBLIC USE FOR WHICH CERTAIN PROPERTIES TO BE TAKEN AND REFERENCE TO STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN; DESCRIBING THE GENERAL LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID PROPERTY TO BE TAKEN; DECLARING FINDINGS AN DETERMINATIONS ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR SAID PROPERTY; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO BE COMMENCED IN SUPERIOR COURT TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY INCLUDING APPLICATION FOR POSSESSION OF SAID PROPERTY PRIOR TO JUDGMENT; AND MAKING OTHER DETERMINATIONS. BUSINESS/DISCUSSION ITEMS 51. Revised Central Business District Ordinance. Ordinance No. 898. City Manager Molendyk advised that this ordinance was the result of a request from the City Council to be able to have the final selection of the Design Review Committee members. George Alongi expressed concern with this ordinance in that it will cause the priorities of the committee members to be similar to those of the Council priorities. He stressed the need to maintain this as a separate organization. MOVED BY DOMINGUEZ, SECONDED BY BUCK TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 898: ORDINANCE NO. 898 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, AMENDING CHAPTER 17.11.050 REGARDING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS OVERLAY DISTRICT. f PAGE FOURTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE - BUSINESS ITEMS 52. Second Readinq = Ordinance No. 890. Relating to the Alberhill Ranch Associates Development Agreement. MOVED BY WINKLER, SECONDED BY STARKEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 890: ORDINANCE NO. 890 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH ALBERHILL RANCH ASSOCIATES. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, WASHBURN NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE - 53. Second Readinq = Ordinance No. 896. Relating to the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center specific Plan - McArthur/Glen Group. continued from June 26, 1990. MOVED BY STARKEY, SECONDED BY BUCK TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 896: ORDINANCE NO. 896 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING THE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO (MCARTHUR/GLEN GROUP). UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCK, DOMINGUEZ, STARKEY, WINKLER, NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: WASHBURN CITY MANAGER COMMENTS - city Manager Mo1endyk requested a joint executive session of the city Council and Redevelopment Agency to discuss matters of potential litigation. f PAGE FIFTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Buck commended staff on the July 4th program. Councilman Dominguez thanked the Chamber of Commerce for the July 4th Fireworks. - Councilman Starkey reminded the community of the requirement to obtain a permit for a yard sale. He expressed concern with the increased traffic on Joy street between Riverside Drive and Machado Street and advised that staff is currently addressing the problem. He further advised that he has received may complaints about the need to clean up the downtown area, including the Day Worker situation, as soon as possible. Mayor Washburn commented on the Sheriff's Department successful effort to stop businesses in the valley from selling alcohol to minors and listed the businesses that have been cited. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 10:12 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 10:14 P.M. CLOSED SESSION THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION AT 10:14 P.M. TO DISCUSS EVMWD AND LAKE MANAGEMENT LITIGATION. THE CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 10:34 P.M. NO ACTION TAKEN. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY BUCK, SECONDED BY DOMINGUEZ AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:35 P.M. CITY F LAKE ELSINORE A~TEST: ~w CLERK CITY OF LAKE EL~INORE - i f