AEI-CASC Engineering-2005-18 A E I C A S C
October 6,2005 E N G I N E E R I N G
Mr. Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5295
SUBJECT: Tentative General Plan Update Proposal
Dear Mr. Koontz:
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. is pleased to provide the following with respect to the City
of Grand Terrace's interest in receiving a proposal to conduct a preliminary evaluation of
the adequacy of its General Plan. It is our understanding that the Scope of Work for the
General Plan Update shall include:
1. A review of the existing General Plan Documents for compliance with current
Planning Law.
2. Identification of specific areas of the General Plan that require updating or
revision based upon the preliminary review.
3. Preparation of a report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the
noted deficiencies, a potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its
elements, a phasing plan focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed
immediately, justification of why the City Council should authorize the project,
and a project timeline.
4. An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
The City of Grand Terrace is clearly aware that the advantages and/or benefits afforded a
community when it develops, maintains, and updates its general plan are as follows:
• Responds to community attitudes and aspirations
• Reduces the staff time and cost for subsequently processing projects as a result of
the environmental analyses contained in an updated plan and corresponding E.I.R.
• Avoids litigation over land use decisions by establishing accurate data for the
consideration of development projects
• Responds to changing land use patterns and expectations of new development
• Protects environmental resource areas
• Accurately identifies changing community needs that serve as the basis for
allocating and prioritizing the use of limited City resources
• Outlines all specific provisions, standards, guidelines, and procedures in one
reference document
• Ensures that infrastructure and related public service and facility improvements
are prioritized and implemented
CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
937 S. VIA LATA, SUITE 500 . COLTON CA 92324 . 909.783.0101 • 909.783.0108 FAX
www.ael-casc.com
City of Grand Terrace
Tentative General Plan Update Proposal
• Identifies and documents changing physical conditions within the community that
could invalidate certain elements of the plan (e.g. noise, circulation, etc.) and
thereby jeopardize the adequacy of the general plan
• Allows for discussion of topics of local concern
• Establishes vision and land use priorities for the development community
• Ensures that City services and facilities will be adequate to meet the needs of
current and future residents of Grand Terrace
• Facilitates streamlined processing of development projects that conform to the
general plan
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. is qualified and prepared to undertake the critical tasks of
(a) Reviewing the existing City of Grand Terrace General Plan Documents for
compliance with current Planning Law; (b) Identifying specific areas of the General Plan
that require updating or revision based upon the preliminary review; (c) Preparing a
report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the noted deficiencies, a
potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its elements, a phasing plan
focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed immediately,justification of why the
City Council should authorize the project, a tentative budget, and a project timeline; and,
(d) An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. proposes to provide the preliminary evaluation of the
adequacy of the City of Grand Terrace General Plan within 21 calendar days from the
execution of an agreement with the City of Grand Terrace at a cost of$6,000.00. This
would include a presentation of our findings and justification for action to the Grand
Terrace City Council.
If this proposal is acceptable to you please indicate so by signing below and returning a
copy to our offices.
Sincerely,
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc.
Tom Nievez�
Planning Director
Accepted: Date:
Gary Koontz
Community Development Director
City of Grand Terrace
2
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. Consultant shall perform services including, but not limited to,the following:
a. A review of the existing General Plan Documents for compliance with current
Planning Law.
b. Identification of specific areas of the General Plan that require updating or
revision based upon the preliminary review.
c. Preparation of a report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the
noted deficiencies, a potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its
elements, a phasing plan focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed
immediately,justification of why the City Council should authorize the project, a
tentative budget, and a project timeline.
d. An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
EXHIBIT "B"
COMPENSATION
Project Rate: Not to Exceed$6,000.00
AEI-CASC ENGINEERING
HOURLY FEE RATE SCHEDULE
January 1,2005
The following rates shall apply to services provided on a time-and-material basis. Rates reflected are hourly.
General Cnnrlrucrinu Manages
President/Principal $170.00 Resident Engineer $122.00
Clerical/Miscellaneous Office Work $60.00 Assistant Resident Engineer $112.00
Senior Field Inspector $96.00
fird Field Inspector 1 $82.00
Engineering Director $138.00 Field Inspector 2 $90.00
Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00
Assistant Project Manager/Senior Project Engineer $112.00 ann•n
Senior Designer/Project Engineer/Calculator $105.00 Planning Director $132.00
Design Engineer/Designer $100.00 Project Manager $120.00
CADD Designer $91.00 Senior Planner $112.00
Senior CADD Drafter $95.00 Planner $100.00
CADD Drafter $65.00 Assistant Planner $86.00
Water Onaffty Services Survey
Engineering Director $138.00 Three Person Survey/GPS Crew $255.00
Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00 Two Person Survey/GPS Crew $230.00
Assistant Project Manager/Senior Project Engineer $112.00 One Person Survey/GPS Crew $200.00
Scientist $107.00 Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00
Senior Field Inspector $96.00 Survey Analyst $105.00
Environmental Analyst I $82.00
Environmental Analyst 11 $90.00 OHier
Field Inspector I $82.00 Litigation Consultant/Expert Witness $335.00
Field Inspector ll $90.00 Computer Time $30.00
Two Person Sampling Crew $179.00
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The following expenses will be billed at cost plus 15%.
Reproduction Services. Includes blueprinting,copying,printing and plotting. In-house plots will be billed at$6.00
per sheet for each client set and for a final in-house review set. The client is welcome to contract directly with an
outside reprographic firm for those services not provided in-house.
Rental Equipment and Fees Any equipment rental and any fees advanced by our firm including plan check and
filing fees.
Commercial Delivery Services. Including Express Mail,Federal Express,UPS and independent courier services.
In-House Pick-Up and Delivery Services These services provided by our firm will be reimbursed at$42.00 per
hour In addition,mileage will be billed at$.55 per mile with no markup.
Travel Expenses Mileage to and from the job site will be billed at a rate of$.55 per mile with no markup and travel
time for survey crews will be billed at$90.00 per hour,per man,one-way Airfare will be billed at cost plus 15%.
Per Diem Per diem for overnight stays will be billed at$134 per day,per man.
Waiver of Subrogation. If the client requires a Waiver of Subrogation for Workman's Compensation Insurance, the
client will be required to pay the additional insurance premium for this request. The approximate amount for the
waiver is$250.00.
NOTE. Invoicing will be submitted on a monthly,progressive cycle.
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. BERKELEY FORT COLLINS POINT RICHMOND
J 1650 SPRUCE STREET, FIFTH FLOOR 951 781.9310 TEL CARLSBAD IRVINE ROCKLIN
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92507 951-781.4277 FAX COLMA PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO
?mil
DD
August 30,2005 �S Y> � 2005
,, :LLB:F. SO.USTEDT
Mr. Gary Koontz ,° ;,ing/Community
Community Development Director a s Department
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,California 92313-5t'07
Subject: General Plan Consistency Review(LSA Proposal No.ZZZ1422D1)
Dear Mr. Koontz:
As a follow-up to our phone conversation regarding LSA's June proposal to complete a General Plan
Consistency Review for the City of Grand Terrace,this letter includes a Task and Budget supplement.
The Task and Budget pages detail the tasks necessary to complete the General Plan review along with
the corresponding budget.
After you have had the opportunity to review the additional information, I would welcome a chance
to further discuss the proposal. My contact numbers are: (951) 781-4277 (phone) or(951) 7814277
(fax).Thank you again for your interest in using services provided by LSA.
Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES,INC.
Lisa Donnell,AICP
Senior Planner
Enclosure: LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace General Plan Consistency
Review
8/30/2005(KAPROPOSAL\PLANNING\Grand TerraceTollow-up Letter.doc)
PLANNING I ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I DESIGN
LSA TASKS AND BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY REVIEW
LSA will complete the tasks below on a time and materials basis not to exceed a fee of$15,000.00.A
breakdown of the project budget is provided below.
Task 1.0—Project Kick-off Meeting and City Tour
LSA will meet with City staff to finalize the program for the General Plan Review. LSA will work
with the project planner to determine document format, schedule, staff issues, and to obtain list of
pertinent contact persons. LSA will obtain all relevant project information including General Plan
maps, General Plan amendments, and environmental documents. LSA will tour the City with staff to
learn about City characteristics,history,and issues.
$ 700.00
Task 2.0—Review General Plan Materials
LSA will review the General Plan documents and information to become familiar with background,
content,and organization.
$ 500.00
Task 3.0—Evaluate and Analyze Existing General Plan Elements
LSA will evaluate each element for consistency with State law including clarity of goals and policies,
organization, and ease of use. Deficiencies will be detailed with recommendations proposed for
additions, modifications, or eliminations. Elements to be analyzed include Land Use (1988),
Circulation (1998), Open Space (1999), Conservation (1988), Safety (1988), Noise (2003), Air
Quality (1999), and Parks & Recreation (1999). The Housing Element is reviewed by HCD for
consistency with State Law and will not be evaluated under this Task.
$ 8,000.00
Task 4.0—Evaluate General Plan Consistency
LSA will analyze all elements of the General Plan including the Housing Element for internal
consistency, format, clarity of figures and maps. Recommendations for possible revisions and
modifications will be provided.
$ 3,600.00
Task 5.0—Administrative Draft General Plan Review
LSA will provide an assembled General Plan Review and provide three (3) copies of an
administrative draft report for City staff review and comments.
$ 500.00
KAPROPOSAL\PLANNING\Grand Terrace\LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace.doc(8/30/2005)
Task 6.0—Final General Plan Review
Based on City Review of the document,LSA will revise the General Plan Review as appropriate and
submit final copies to the City.
$ 1,000.00
Task 7.0—Editing/Processing,and Production
LSA maintains a quality control procedure which ensures that documents meet our high standards
before they are released for public review. Our editing and word processing department is in charge
of reviewing all documents.
i400.00
Labor Total $14,700.00
Reimbursable Expenses:
LSA will produce three (3) copies of the Administrative Draft and fifteen (15) copies of the Final
General Plan Review.
Reimbursable Expenses $ 300.00
Total $15,000.00
I
I
KAPROPOSAL\PLANNING\Grand Terrace\LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace.doc(8/30/2005) 2
CC-2005 121 MOTION BY COUNTCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM
CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the funding for General Plan evaluation
and to authorize staff to award a consulting agreement to AEI-CASC in the amount
of$6,000 with a 21 day'schedule.
STAFF REPORT
s - -
CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: October 27, 2005
FUNDING REQUIRED: (X ) NO FUNDING REQUIRED ( )
SUBJECT: Consulting Agreement for General Plan Evaluation
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize funding for a consulting services agreement
with AEI-CASC to prepare an analysis of the adequacy
of the City's General Plan.
Background: The City's General Plan serves as a basis for all land use decisions. The
General Plan includes seven elements that have been adopted over the past 20 years. Theses
include the original General Plan of Land Use adopted in 1988 with additional elements
addressing Air Quality, Open Space and Conservation, Circulation,Housing,Noise, and Safety.
State planning law requires that the General Plan for each city and county in California be
reviewed on a periodic basis to determine its adequacy and compliance with current planning
regulations.
Staff has received proposals to perform a preliminary evaluation of the City's General Plan from
two local qualified consulting firms. Proposals have been received from LSA Associates, Inc. of
Riverside and AEI-CASC of Colton. Both proposals propose to review all elements of the
General Plan, identify areas that require updating or revision, identify any priorities in the
revision process, identify environmental documents that should be prepared, and submit a draft
schedule and estimated budget for the revisions.
LSA proposes to conduct the evaluation for a fee of$15,000 with a 60 day schedule. AEI-CASC
proposes to perform the evaluation for a fee of$6,000 with a 21 day schedule.
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize funding for the general Plan evaluation and
authorize staff to award a consulting agreement to AEI-CASC to conduct the study.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Nye
AEI --4-=�YCASC
October 6, 2005 E N G I N E E R I N G
Mr. Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5295
SUBJECT: Tentative General Plan Update Proposal
Dear Mr. Koontz:
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. is pleased to provide the following with respect to the City
of Grand Terrace's interest in receiving a proposal to conduct a preliminary evaluation of
the adequacy of its General Plan. It is our understanding that the Scope of Work for the
General Plan Update shall include:
1. A review of the existing General Plan Documents for compliance with current
Planning Law.
2. Identification of specific areas of the General Plan that require updating or
revision based upon the preliminary review.
3. Preparation of a report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the
noted deficiencies, a potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its
elements, a phasing plan focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed
immediately, justification of why the City Council should authorize the project,
and a project timeline.
4. An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
The City of Grand Terrace is clearly aware that the advantages and/or benefits afforded a
community when it develops, maintains, and updates its general plan are as follows:
• Responds to community attitudes and aspirations
• Reduces the staff time and cost for subsequently processing projects as a result of
the environmental analyses contained in an updated plan and corresponding E.I.R.
• Avoids litigation over land use decisions by establishing accurate data for the
consideration of development projects
• Responds to changing land use patterns and expectations of new development
• Protects environmental resource areas
• Accurately identifies changing community needs that serve as the basis for
allocating and prioritizing the use of limited City resources
• Outlines all specific provisions, standards, guidelines, and procedures in one
reference document
• Ensures that infrastructure and related public service and facility improvements
are prioritized and implemented
CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANNING SURVEYING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
937 S. VIA LATA, SUITE 500 • COLTON CA 92324 • 909.783.0101 a 909.783.0108 FAX
www.ael-casc.com
City of Grand Terrace
Tentative General Plan Update Proposal
• Identifies and documents changing physical conditions within the community that
could invalidate certain elements of the plan (e.g. noise, circulation, etc.) and
thereby jeopardize the adequacy of the general plan
• Allows for discussion of topics of local concern
• Establishes vision and land use priorities for the development community
• Ensures that City services and facilities will be adequate to meet the needs of
current and future residents of Grand Terrace
• Facilitates streamlined processing of development projects that conform to the
general plan
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. is qualified and prepared to undertake the critical tasks of
(a) Reviewing the existing City of Grand Terrace General Plan Documents for
compliance with current Planning Law; (b) Identifying specific areas of the General Plan
that require updating or revision based upon the preliminary review; (c) Preparing a
report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the noted deficiencies, a
potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its elements, a phasing plan
focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed immediately,justification of why the
City Council should authorize the project, a tentative budget , and a project timeline; and,
(d) An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc. proposes to provide the preliminary evaluation of the
adequacy of the City of Grand Terrace General Plan within 21 calendar days from the
execution of an agreement with the City of Grand Terrace at a cost of$6,000.00. This
would include a presentation of our findings and justification for action to the Grand
Terrace City Council.
If this proposal is acceptable to you please indicate so by signing below and returning a
copy to our offices.
Sincerely,
AEI-CASC Engineering, Inc.
Tom Nievez
Planning Director
Accepted: Date:
Gary Koontz
Community Development Director
City of Grand Terrace
2
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. Consultant shall perform services including, but not limited to,the following:
a. A review of the existing General Plan Documents for compliance with current
Planning Law.
b. Identification of specific areas of the General Plan that require updating or
revision based upon the preliminary review.
c. Preparation of a report that may be sent to the City Council summarizing the
noted deficiencies, a potential work program to update the General Plan and/or its
elements, a phasing plan focusing upon critical areas that must be addressed
immediately,justification of why the City Council should authorize the project, a
tentative budget, and a project timeline. `
d. An explanation of the environmental documentation required for completion of a
major update.
EXHIBIT "B"
COMPENSATION
Project Rate: Not to Exceed$6,000.00
J
AEI-CASC ENGINEERING
HOURLY FEE RATE SCHEDULE
January 1,2005
The following rates shall apply to services provided on a time-and-material basis. Rates reflected are hourly
,dal Construrtion Management
PresidentWncipal $170.00 Resident Engineer $122.00
Clerical/Miscellaneous Office Work $60.00 Assistant Resident Engineer $112.00
Senior Field Inspector $96.00
C'ipi! Field Inspector 1 $82.00
Engineering Director $138.00 Field Inspector 2 $90.00
Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00
Assistant Project Manager/Senior Project Engineer $112.00 P annin
Senior Designer/Project Engineer/Calculator $105.00 . Planning Director $132.00
Design Engineer/Designer $100.00 Project Manager $120.00
CADD Designer $91.00 Senior Plarmer $112.00
Senior CADD Drafter $85.00 Plarmer $100.00
CADD Drafter $65.00 Assistant Planner $86.00
Water Services Survey
Engineering Director $138.00 Three Person Survey/GPS Crew $255.00
Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00 Two Person Survey/GPS Crew $230.00
Assistant Project Manager/Senior Project Engineer $112.00 One Person Survey/GPS Crew $200.00-
Scientist $107.00 Senior Project Manager/Project Manager $130.00
Senior Field Inspector $96.00 Survey Analyst $105.00
Environmental Analyst I $82.00
Environmental Analyst lI $90.00 Q&a
Field Inspector I $82.00 Litigation Consultant/Expert Witness $335.00
Field Inspector II $90.00 Computer Time $30.00
1
Two Person Sampling Crew $179.00
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The following expenses will be billed at cost plus 15%:
Reproduction Services. Includes blueprinting,copying,printing and plotting. In-house plots will be billed at$6.00
per sheet for each client set and for a final in-house review set. The client is welcome to contract directly with an
outside reprographic firm for those services not provided in-house.
Rental Equipment and Fees• Any equipment rental and any fees advanced by our firm including plan check and
filing fees.
Commercial Delivery Services. Including Express Mail,Federal Express;UPS and independent courier services.
In-House Pick-Up and Delivery Services These services provided by our firm will be reimbursed at$42.00 per
hour In addition,mileage will be billed at$.55 per mile with no markup.
Travel Expenses.Mileage to and from the job site will be billed at a rate of$.55 per mile with no markup and travel
time for survey crews will be billed at$90.00 per hour,per man,one-way Airfare will be billed at cost plus 15%.
Per Diem Per diem for overnight stays will be billed at$134 per day,per man.
Waiver of Subrogation. If the client requires a Waiver of Subrogation for Workman's Compensation Insurance, the
client will be required to pay the additional insurance premium for this request. The approximate amount for the
waiver is$250.00. '
NOTE: Invoicing will be submitted on a monthly,progressive cycle.
a • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC BERKELEY FORT COLLINS POINT RICHMOND
L 1650 SPRUCE STREET, FIFTH FLOOR 951.781.9310 TEL CARLSBAD IRVINE ROCKLIN '
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92507 951 781.4277 FAX COLMA PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO
August 30,2005
; ) o� 2005
F. SOUSTEDT
Mr. Gary Koontz i :ing/Community
Community Development Director - =v.s Department
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,C;aiiiornia 92313-5207
Subject: General Plan Consistency Review(LSA Proposal No. ZZZ1422D1)
r
Dear Mr.Koontz:
As a follow-up to our phone conversation regarding LSA's June proposal to complete a General Plan
Consistency Review for the City of Grand Terrace,this letter includes a Task and Budget supplement.
The Task and Budget pages detail the tasks necessary to complete the General Plan review along with
the corresponding budget. -
After you have had the opportunity to review the additional information, I would welcome a chance
to further discuss the proposal. My contact numbers are: (951) 781-4277 (phone) or(951) 781-4277
(fax). Thank you'again for your interest in using services provided by LSA.
Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES,INC.
Lisa Donnell,AICP
Senior Planner
Enclosure: LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace General Plan Consistency
Review
8/30/2005(K:\PROPOSAL\PLANNING\Grand TerraceTollow-up Letter.doc)
PLANNING I ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I DESIGN
LSA TASKS AND BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY REVIEW
LSA will complete the tasks below on a time and materials basis not to exceed a fee of$15,000.00. A
breakdown of the project budget is provided below.
Task 1.0—Project Kick-off Meeting and City Tour
LSA will meet with City staff to finalize the program for the General Plan Review. LSA will work
with the project planner to determine document format, schedule, staff issues, and to obtain list of
pertinent contact persons. LSA will obtain all relevant project information including General Plan
maps, General Plan amendments, and environmental documents. LSA will tour the City with staff to
learn about City characteristics, history, and issues.
$ 700.00
Task 2.0—Review General Plan Materials
LSA will review the General Plan documents and information to become familiar with background,
content,and organization.
$ 500.00
Task 3.0—Evaluate and Analyze Existing General Plan Elements
LSA will evaluate each element for consistency with State law including clarity of goals and policies,
organization, and ease of use. Deficiencies will be detailed with recommendations proposed for
additions, modifications, or eliminations. Elements to be analyzed include Land Use (1988),
Circulation (1998), Open Space (1999), Conservation (1988), Safety (1988), Noise (2003), Air
Quality (1999), and Parks & Recreation (1999). The Housing Element is reviewed by HCD for
consistency with State Law and will not be evaluated under this Task.
$ 8,000.00
Task 4.0—Evaluate General Plan Consistency
LSA will analyze all elements of the General Plan including the Housing Element for internal
consistency, format, clarity of figures and maps. Recommendations for possible revisions and
modifications will be provided.
$ 3,600.00
Task 5.0—Administrative Draft General Plan Review
LSA will provide an assembled General Plan Review and provide three (3) copies of an
administrative draft report for City staff review and comments.
$ 500.00
KAPROPOSAL\PLANNING\Grand Terrace\LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace.doc(8/30/2005)
Task 6.0—Final General Plan Review
Based on City Review of the document, LSA will revise the General Plan Review as appropriate and
submit final copies to the City.
$ 1,000.00
Task 7.0—Editing/Processing,and Production
LSA maintains a quality control procedure which ensures that documents meet our high standards
before they are released for public review. Our editing and word processing department is in charge
of reviewing all documents.
$ 400.00
Labor Total $14,700.00
Reimbursable Expenses:
LSA will produce three (3) copies of the Administrative Draft and fifteen (15) copies of the Final
General Plan Review.
Reimbursable Expenses $ 300.00
Total $15,000.00
KAPROPOSAUPLANNING\Grand Terrace\LSA Tasks and Budget for the City of Grand Terrace.doc(8/30/2005) 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Preliminary Evaluation of the Adequacy of the City of Grand Terrace General Plan
The City of Grand Terrace adopted its current General Plan in 1988. According to State
of California Guidelines, cities and counties are encouraged to update their general plans
every ten(10) years. The general plan serves to: (1) identify the community's vision of
land use, circulation, environmental, economic, and social goals and policies as they
relate to land use and development; (2) Provide a basis for local government decision-
making, including decisions on development approvals and exactions; (3) Provide
citizens with opportunities to participate in the planning and decision-making processes
of their communities; and (4) Inform citizens, developers, decision-makers, and other
cities and counties of the ground rules that guide development within a particular
community. The General Plan should be reviewed regularly, regardless of its horizon,
and revised as new information becomes available and as community needs and values
change. A General Plan based upon outdated information and projections is not a sound
basis for day-to-day decision-making. Such a plan may be legally inadequate, subject the
city to lengthy litigation, and be susceptible to successful legal challenge. The state is
empowered to impose moratoriums upon the issuance of any land use entitlement and
building permits until such time that the General Plan is updated and found to be
acceptable.
A comparison of the existing City of Grand Terrace General Plan to current.State General
Plan Guidelines finds it deficient in the following areas:
1. The plan lacks Transit Oriented Development policies.
2. The plan does not address the implications of Environmental Justice.
3. An Aesthetic, Cultural, and Recreational Resources Element must be assessed
against current National Recreation and Park Association facility standards.
4. The plan lacks Seismic mapping.
5. The plan lacks a Household Hazardous Waste Element.
6. The plan lacks reference to current Floodplain Management Regulations.
7. There is no evidence of Critical Habitat designations pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act.
8. The plan is silent on any Mineral Resources Mining and the status of any
Agricultural Preserves in the City.
Because the City is largely built out, quality of life and land use issues are of principal
interest to residents as the City contends with the development of its remaining parcels.
The current update proposed is not intended to be a comprehensive reworking of the
entire General Plan, but will focus on two General Plan Elements: Land Use and
Circulation. The other General Plan Elements (Open Space, Conservation, Noise,
Housing, and Safety)will be updated for consistency, as needed.
The update project will require the completion of "six-step" work program. Step I
involves the Startup. During this step, the community will be informed about the overall
update process. Comments will be sought from individuals, organizations,
neighborhoods and agencies. Step 2 involves Identifying Issues and Alternatives. The
issues identified at startup will be analyzed and alternative policy solutions developed.
Step 3 involves the Selection of a Preferred Alternative. Workshops will be held to
compare alternative plan policies and develop community consensus. Step 4 involves
Preparing a Draft-General Plan and Environmental Impact Report. The Draft Plan will
include preferred goals, policies, and implementation measures. The Draft EIR will be
prepared concurrently to evaluate the environmental affects of implementing the draft
plan. Step 5 involves Conducting Public Review and Adopting the Plan. Drafts of the
General Plan and EIR will be distributed for community review and then scheduled for
public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Step 6 involves
preparing amendments to the Zoning, Subdivision and other City Ordinances
implementing the General Plan. Updates may require amendments in order to assure that
such ordinances are internally consistent with the guidelines and policies of the updated
General Plan.
The goal of the current program is to update the General Plan to provide a community-
wide `vision' through guidance and direction for future development and economic
stimulus to meet the needs of the City's residents and business community. It seeks to
preserve the character and natural resources of the City while providing opportunities for
development of new and affordable housing options, providing additional jobs for
residents, creating more recreational and cultural foci, and improving connections
between the unique parts of the City.
The cost of updating a General Plan varies tremendously relative to the scope of the
update program. According to recent findings of the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research, the average cost of a General Plan update is $225,000 for cities (The 2003
California Planer's Book of Lists, Governor's-Office of Planning and Research). Based
upon the preliminary analysis of the deficiencies of the current General Plan contained
herein, the update program proposed for the City of Grand Terrace appears consistent
with this figure.
A General Plan Update is typically a two-year process. The first year generally includes
the initiation of public participation efforts and identification of the issues to be addressed
in the General Plan. Second year tasks typically include preparing technical analysis,
updating goals, policies, and objectives and assessing he potential environmental impact
of the update. Due to its general lack of compliance with current Planning Law the
Grand Terrace Update should require 22-24 months to complete.
Updating the general plan is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)
and requires preparation and consideration of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
The primary purpose of the EIR is to inform decision-makers and the public of the
potential significant environmental effects of the proposal,-less damaging alternatives,
and possible ways to reduce or avoid the possible environmental damage. The EIR must
describe the existing local and regional physical environment, emphasizing those features
that are likely to be affected by the plan and the environmental constraints and resources
2
that are rare or unique to the area. It should describe existing infrastructure, i.e. roads,
water systems, and sewage treatment facilities, along with their capacities and current
levels of use. It should discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed plan and
adopted regional plans as they may relate to environmental issues.
The EIR must evaluate the proposed plan's effects on both the existing physical
conditions of the actual environment and the environment envisioned by the proposed
general plan. The EIR must identify mitigation measures and alternatives to avoid or
minimize potential impacts to the extent feasible. The General Plan EIR is a particularly
useful tool for identifying measures to mitigate the cumulative effects of new
development. The EIR must also evaluate the "no project" alternative. This would
describe what physical changes might reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable
future if the new or revised General Plan were not adopted, based on the existing General
Plan and available infrastructure and services. Growth inducing impacts must, also, be
analyzed. Examples include plans for street and highway improvements in undeveloped
areas, a proposal for wastewater treatment plant expansion, and proposals for the
expansion of employment in basic industries, any of which is likely to increase pressure
for or facilitate residential and other development.
Prior to writing the draft EIR the city must send a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the
EIR describing the draft general plan proposal to a number of parties, including all
affected state responsible and trustee agencies, the State Clearinghouse, any large water
agency that may provide domestic water in the planning area, and other agencies to
solicit their input. In addition, the city must convene at least one scoping meeting to
receive input on the scope and content of the draft EIR from the public.
Before adopting the general plan, element, or revision for which the EIR was prepared,
the city council must consider the final EIR, certify its adequacy, and make explicit
findings explaining how the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR have
been or should be mitigated or explain why mitigation measures and identified
alternatives are not feasible.
In order to minimize the need to reanalyze a series of projects related to the general plan,
CEQA and the state CEQA Guidelines encourage using a General Plan EIR to address
subsequent discretionary projects that are consistent with the General Plan. This
streamlined approach to environmental review is commonly called "tiering".
Upon certifying a General Plan EIR, the city must make findings pursuant to CEQA for
each of the significant effects identified in the EIR These findings require the city to
state which mitigation measures or alternatives are to be imposed on the plan, which are
the responsibility of other agencies to carryout, and which are infeasible. These findings
must be supported by substantial evidence in the records. CEQA Guidelines require the
city to make a statement of overriding considerations for any significant effects that
cannot be mitigated.
3
Exhibit A
City of Grand Terrace
General Plan Update
Work Program Proposal
The City Council of Grand Terrace is responsible for regulating development within the
corporate limits of the City. The principal means for accomplishing this is the General
Plan, which prescribes the policies and guidelines for making land use decisions. The
first paragraph of the State General Plan Guidelines states "California State law requires
each city and county to adopt a general plan for the physical development of the county,
city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to planning. The role of a
community's general plan is to act as a `constitution'; a basis for rational decisions
regarding a city's or county's long-term physical development. The general plan
expresses the community's development goals and embodies public policy relative to the
distribution of future land uses,both public and private."
The General Plan is presented as a collection of chapters or "elements" of which seven
are mandatory. The seven State-mandated elements are: Land Use, Circulation,
Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise and Safety. In addition to these mandated or
statutory elements, the city may adopt any other elements that relate to its physical
development. -
The City of Grand Terrace adopted a General Plan in 1988. According to State of
California guidelines, cities and counties are encouraged to update their general plans
every ten years. Grand Terrace is preparing to embark on an exciting process that will
examine the changes in the population, economy and physical environment experienced
by the City and Southern California over the last 17 years and how it will move toward
its community vision over the next 20 years. The goal of the current program is to update
the General Plan to provide a community-wide "vision" through guidance and direction
for future development and economic stimulus to meet the needs of the City's residents
and business community. It seeks to preserve the character and natural resources of the
City while providing opportunities for development of new and affordable housing
options, providing additional jobs for residents, creating more recreational and cultural
foci, and improving connections between the unique parts of the City.
The update project will require the preparation of technical studies, reports, and surveys
to establish the existing environmental setting, identify pertinent community issues, and
determine community needs. As part of the General Plan Update process the City will
sponsor community workshops to provide opportunities for public input. It is estimated
that the General Plan Update Project will take 22 months to complete.
Some of the topics the General Plan Update will cover include:
• locations of public facilities such s parks, open space, and cultural facilities,
• locations and types of new housing developments,
• locations of future commercial and industrial developments,
• determining how large and how tall buildings should be,
• improving the transportations system and dealing with traffic congestion,
• addressing quality of life issues such as noise,air quality,public safety, schools,
and the design of buildings and public spaces.
How the General Plan Will Be Updated
This update will be accomplished in steps. The community is involved in each step along
the way. The main steps and desired outcomes are:
Step 1: Startup
During this step, the community will be informed about the overall update process.
Comments will be sought from individuals, organizations, neighborhoods and agencies.
For example, an initial series of community meetings will be held, with follow up Critical
Choices workshops to ensue.
Step 2: Identifying Issues and Alternatives
Here the issues identified at startup will be analyzed and alternative policy solutions
developed. The background studies will be used to identify constraints and opportunities.
Alternative plan policies will be proposed and prioritized.
Step 3: Select a Preferred Alternative
Workshops will be held to compare alternative plan policies. Neighborhood groups and
individuals will focus on issues and present their findings and preferences to others in an
open forum. The Planning Commission and City Council will be involved and be able to
gauge public opinion before decisions are made.
Step 4: Preparing a Draft of the General Plan and Environmental Impact Report
(EIR)
A Draft Plan will be prepared that will include preferred goals, policies, and
implementation measures. A Draft EIR will be prepared concurrently to evaluate the
environmental affects of implementing the draft plan. The Draft Plan will include
Neighborhood Plans and the Citywide Plan Elements for Land Use, Circulation, Housing,
Conservation, Open Space,Noise and Safety.
Step 5: Conducting Public Review and Adopting the Plan
Once drafts of the General Plan and EIR are prepared, they will be distributed for
community review and then be scheduled for public hearing before the Planning
Commission and City Council.
City of Grand Terrace 2
General Plan Update
Work Program Proposal
Step 6: Amending the Zoning,Subdivision and Other Implementing Ordinances
Implementing .the City of Grand Terrace General Plan Update may require amendments
to current zoning and other land development regulations (e.g. Subdivision Ordinance) in
order to assure that such ordinances are internally consistent with the guidelines and
policies of the updated General Plan.
The City's current General Plan was adopted in 1988. Because the city is largely built
out, quality of life and land use issues continue to be of interest to residents as the City
contends with the development of its remaining parcels. The current update is not
intended to be a comprehensive reworking of the entire General Plan, but will focus on
two General Plan Elements: Land Use and Circulation. The other General Plan
Elements (Circulation, Open Space, Conservation„ Noise, Housing, and Safety) will be
updated for consistency, as needed. The Housing Element will not be updated as part of
this process.
The City Council will establish a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) which is
recommended to consist of two City Council members, two Planning Commissioners,
and five members selected at-large by each Councilmember. This Committee shall serve
to represent the interests of the community at large, will participate in community
meetings on the General Plan Update Program, will hold several meetings throughout the
Update process and will review and comment on draft sections of the General Plan
Update as they are created. The GPAC will meet periodically with the Consultant to
provide guidance on the General Plan Update process.
As a part of the first step in the General Plan Update process a survey to receive
feedback from the community will be the distributed to every household and business in
the City. Based on the results of the survey, neighborhood workshops will be held on a
variety of subject matters. The update of the General Plan will be subject to Planning
Commission and City Council public hearings prior to final adoption.
Once the results of the survey are known,they will be published on the City's website. In
addition, community residents will be encouraged to communicate any additional
questions or comments throughout the update process through the Community and
Economic Development Department at 909-430-2247 or via email at
www.cit�ofgandterrace.org.
The community participation program will involve on-going outreach throughout the
General Plan Update process. The intent is to seek community opinions and feedback on
General Plan goals and policies, especially as they relate to land use and circulation
issues, that collectively capture the community's vision for the future of Grand Terrace.
Open,inclusive community workshops and meetings,verbal and written feedback, and
public hearings will encourage public involvement during each step in order to "build"a
community plan. The process to identify community concerns will be the same at each
City of Grand Terrace 3
General Plan Update
Work Program Proposal
neighborhood meeting. The General Plan Update must have the support of the
community to be an effective document for the coming years.
The City will conduct at least two (2) community workshops during the General Plan
Update, covering a wide range of topics. If requested, City staff and the General Plan
Update Consultants will also meet with individuals and groups to hear concerns and ideas
on an on-going basis.
Meeting Notices, Agendas and Reports shall be posted as soon as they are available.
Draft Summary Minutes will be prepared following each meeting and posted as soon as
possible. Draft Minutes will be replaced by Final Minutes as they are approved by the
hearing body at a subsequent meeting. All meetings for the GPAC will be posted on the
City's webpage.
Timeline
The General Plan Update is anticipated to be a two-year process. The first year includes
the initiation of public participation efforts (surveys, community workshops, etc) and
identification of the issues to be addressed in the General Plan. Community workshops
will be held towards the beginning of 2006.
Second year tasks will include preparing the technical analysis (such as traffic and land
use studies), updating the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan and
assessing the potential environmental impact of the updates pursuant to the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).
Budget
The cost of updating the City of Grand Terrace General Plan will vary tremendously
relative to the scope of the update program. A recent survey by OPR indicated that the
average cost of a general plan update was $255,000 for cities (The 2003 California
Planner's Book of Lists, Governor's Office of Planning and Research). Based upon the
preliminary analysis of the deficiencies of the current General Plan, the update program
proposed for the City of Grand Terrace appears consistent with this figure.
City of Grand Terrace 4
General Plan Update
Work Program Proposal
Exhibit B
Public Participation
(Chapter 8, State of California, General Plan Guidelines 2003, Governor's Office of
Planning and Research)
When a general plan is written or amended, state law requires the planning agency to
provide opportunities for the involvement of public agencies, public utility companies,
community groups, and the general public through public hearings or other appropriate
methods (§65351).
The law also requires that a jurisdiction make a diligent effort to include all economic
groups when drafting its housing element(§65583).
Statute requires two public hearings before a jurisdiction can adopt or amend a general
plan: one by the planning commission and another by the legislative body.
Failure to allow the public to meaninglyparticipate in planning decisions that a fect
their communities may overturn the results o f general plan process.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
State law defines environmental justice as, "The fair treatment of all races, cultures, and
incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws,regulations and policies.
A well-designed public participation process allows planners, decision-makers, and the
community to engage in a meaningful dialogue about the future development of the city.
OPEN MEETINGS
State law allows the public to attend all meetings of appointed advisory communities,
planning commissions, and local legislative bodies, with a few exceptions (Brown Act,
§54959, et seq.)
There are many practical reasons to involve the public in the general plan process or in
any other planning process. These include:
• Providing valuable information leading to more informed policy development by
decision-makers.
• Insuring the plan's successful implementation by building a base of long-term
support with the public.
• Reducing the likelihood of conflict and drawn-out battles by addressing public
concerns during the general plan process rather than on a case-by-case basis in the
future.
OPR General Plan Guidelines 1
Public Participation
Public participation as part of the general plan process can have positive impacts on the
entire community, including:
• Educating the public about community issues.
• Increasing the public's ability and desire to participate in the community.
• Enhancing trust in government by strengthening the relationship between elected
officials, government staff, and the public.
• Working towards community consensus and creating a vision for the future.
• Laying the ground work for community revitalization and increased investment in
the community.
• Obtaining public input regarding plan policies and community issues and
objectives.
• Providing the public with opportunities to evaluate alternative plans and to
participate in developing and choosing a plan that works for their community.
• Informing decision-makers about public opinion.
Community members should be included in the general plan process as soon as possible.
A visioning process, focus groups, or advisory committee can be used to identify issues
and involve the community before the process is designed.
It is critical to understand the issues that are important to different segments of the
community, including residents,business owners, and elected decision-makers.
The process should be simple and transparent; participants should be updated frequently
as the process moves forward.
The entire process should be documented. This includes keeping a record of and
reporting on all groups that have been contacted, any information that is used to inform
the process, and all decisions that are made.
The process should be as engaging, interactive, and fun as possible.
Sponsorship
In order to encourage the public to be involved, participants need to know that the
process has the support of local elected officials and that decision-makers will respect the
outcome.
Inclusiveness
All elected stakeholders should be represented in any public participation process.
Stakeholder groups in the general plan process may include:
• Community and neighborhood groups
• Utility and public service providers
• Educational institutions
OPR General Plan Guidelines 2
Public Participation
• Industry and business
• Civic and community service organizations
• Non-governmental organizations
• Religious communities
• Other public agencies
Language
All communication should be done in all of the major languages spoken in the
community.
Location and time
Hold events in locations where participants feel welcome and that are familiar to them.
Schedule a variety of meeting times based on the needs of your community.
A mix of weekday, weeknight, and weekend meetings will allow all segments of the
community to participate.
Surveys
• Mailing them
• Including them in community newsletters
• Inserting them in utility bills
• Printing them in local newspapers
• Leaving them in city hall or county offices, coffee shops, and other community
gathering places
• Posting them on a website
A good survey includes the public early on in the process, broadens the range of those
involved by including residents who do not come to meetings, and publicizes the general
plan process.
Partnerships
• Civic groups
• Community events
• Media outlets
Committees
• Focus groups to identify issues and help strategize on outreach efforts
• Neighborhood associations
• Task forces developed around the specific issues or elements of the plan
• Planning advisory committees and technical review committees to provide
specialized input
• A steering committee to provide ongoing policy and process direction and to
address any problems that may arise
OPR General Plan Guidelines 3
Public Participation
Meetings
Identify what a meeting's outcomes to be when designing it.
Plan meetings at key points during the general plan process based on the desired
outcome.
Meeting types include:
• Public hearings
• Town hall meetings
• Open houses
• Panel discussions
• Neighborhood meetings
• Focus groups
• Small in-home meetings
• Planning fairs
Workshops can educate community members and help identify community values and
issues.
A charrette is an intensive, interactive design process where the public is part of an
interdisciplinary team that can include planners, architects, engineers, and artists.
OPR General Plan Guidelines 4
Public Participation
Exhibit C
CEQA and the General Plan
(Chapter 7, State of California, General Plan Guidelines 2003,'Governor's Office of
Planning and Research)
Adopting or amending a general plan or a general plan element is subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA,Public Resources Code §21000, et seq.)
and requires preparation and consideration of an environmental impact report(EIR).
The primary purpose of an EIR is to inform decision-makers and the public of the
potential significant environmental effects of a proposal, less damaging alternatives, and
possible ways to reduce or avoid the possible environmental damage.
A general plan for which an EIR is prepared is considered a project of statewide,
regional,or areawide significance (CEQA Guidelines §15206).
Projects of statewide, regional, or areawide significance have some specific requirements
for scoping,review and mitigation monitoring.
The EIR must describe the existing local and regional physical environment, emphasizing
those features that are likely to be affected by the plan and the environmental constraints
and resource that are rare or unique to the area.
It should describe existing infrastructure, such as roads,water systems, and sewage
treatment facilities, along with their capacities and current levels of use.
It should also discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed plan and adopted
regional plans as they may relate to environmental issues.
When a new general plan or a revision is being considered,the EIR must evaluate the
existing physical conditions of the actual environment and the environment envisioned by
the existing general plan (Environmental Planning and Information Council v. County of
El Dorado (9182) 131 Cal.App,3d 354).
In addition to the direct impacts of nay immediate projects that will occur under the
general plan, the EIR must focus on the secondary effects that can be expected to follow
from the plan's adoption, including cumulative and growth-inducing effects.
The general plan EIR need not be as detailed as an EIR for the specific projects that will
follow 9CEQA Guidelines §15146).
Its level of detail should reflect the level contained in the plan or plan element being
considered (Rio Vista Farm Bureau Center v. County of Solano (1992) 5 Ca1.App. 4`�'
351)
The lead agency cannot defer to later tiered EIRs its analysis of any significant effect of
the general plan (Stanislaus Natural Heritage Project, Sierra Club v. County of
Stanislaus (1996) 48 Cal.App,4`h 182).
The EIR must identify mitigation measures and alternatives to avoid or minimize
potential impacts,to the extent feasible. The general plan EIR is a particularly useful tool
for identifying measures to mitigate the cumulative effects of new development.
A reasonable range of alternatives would typically include different levels of density and
compactness, as well as different locations and types of uses for future development.
The EIR must also evaluate the"no project" alternative.
Growth—inducing impacts must also be analyzed. Examples include plans for street and
highway improvements in undeveloped areas, a proposal for wastewater treatment plant
expansion, and proposal for the expansion of employment in basic industries, any of
which is likely to increase pressure for or facilitate residential and other development.
When developing a draft work program for the general plan, staff should lay out the
schedule for preparing the EIR.
Prior to writing the draft EIR,the city must send a Notice Of Preparation(NOP) of the
EIR describing the draft general plan proposal to a number of parties, including all
affected state responsible and trustee agencies,the State Clearinghouse, any large water
agency that my provide domestic water in the planning area, and the other agencies listed
under §65352, to solicit their input.
The city must provide for at least one scoping meeting to receive input on the scope and
content of the draft EIR(Public Resource Code §21083.9).
The draft EIR(incorporating the comments form the NOP)must be circulated among
interested local and regional agencies and the public for review.
Copies of the draft EIR should be made available in the local library.
Copies must also be sent to the State Clearinghouse within OPR for distribution to state
agencies.
CEQA does not require a public hearing on the draft EIR.
Before adopting the general plan, element or revision for which the EIR was prepared,
the city council must consider the final EIR, certify its adequacy, and make explicit
findings explaining how the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR have
been or should be mitigated or explain why mitigation measures and identified
alternatives are not feasible (CEQA Guidelines §15093).
CEQA and the General Plan 2
The jurisdiction must also adopt a mitigation monitoring or reporting program to ensure
that the mitigation incorporated into the plan in accordance with the EIR will be
implemented.
When an EIR has been certified for a general plan,the CEQA analysis of later projects
can be limited to those significant effects that are peculiar to the project" and that either
were not addressed as significant effects in the plan's EIR or that new information shows
will be more significant than when the plan's EIR was certified.
A local government may prepare a combined general plan and EIR as a set of three
documents. The first document would contain information on the physical and
environmental setting, including inventories of soils, hydrology, air quality,vegetation,
wildlife,energy, cultural heritage, ambient noise, existing land use,transportation,
population,public services, and water quality. It must also describe federal and state
laws and regional plans concerning these issues.
This document would provide the data and analysis out of which general plan policies
would evolve and would constitute the"environmental setting" section of the policies,
plan proposals, standards, and implementation program of the draft general plan.
The third document would consist of the environmental assessment-that is,the discussion
of effects, mitigation measures, and alternatives needed to satisfy the requirements of an
EIR.
CAUTION: Combining the general plan and its EIR is often impractical. The draft
combined plan/EIR can be unwieldy for reviewers to analyze and expensive to revise and
reproduce. Additionally, unless the final plan is carefully purged of those mitigation
measures and alternatives identified in the EIR that were rejected upon plan approval, it
will contain extraneous policies and plan proposals that were not intended to be carried
out.
Upon certifying a general plan EIR,the city must make findings pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15091 for each of the significant effects identified in the EIR. These
findings require the jurisdiction to state which mitigation measures or alternatives are to
be imposed on the plan, which are the responsibility of other agencies to carry out, and
which are infeasible.
CEQA Guidelines §15093 requires the city to make a statement of overriding
considerations for any significant effects that cannot be mitigated.
An EIR prepared for a general plan adoption or revision qualifies as a community-level
environmental review.
CEQA and the General Plan 3