04/17/2008 Communitv and Economic Development Department .
GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COM IISSION
I MINUTES:OF REGULAR MEETING
(A l I f O R N I A APRIL 17,2008
The resular meetins of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the
Grand Terrace Civic Center. 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on APRIL
17,2008 at 7:00 p.m.,by Chairman Wilson.
PRESENT:
Doug Wilson, Chairperson
Matthew Addington, Vice Chairperson
Darcy McNaboe, Commissioner
Brian Phelps, Commissioner
Gary Koontz, Planning Director
Richard Shields,Building &Safety Director
Sandra Molina, Senior Planner
Jerina Cordova,Planning Secretary
ABSENT:
Tom Comstock, Commissioner
7:03 P.M. CONVENED SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
• Call to Order
• Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Darcy McNaboe
• Roll Call
• Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by
the Chairman. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written
request to be agendized to the Director of Community and Economic Development.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
PATRICIA FARLEY
12513 Michigan Street
Ms. Farley formally requested the Planning Commission to revoke Schwertfeger's Conditional
Use Permit(CUP). Ms. Farley believed that it was necessary to revoke the CUP in order to
prevent the City from being irreparably damaged and destroyed. Ms. Farley believed uses have
been allowed and those uses are in conflict with the General Plan.
. 1
22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • 909/ 824-6621
_ Ms. Farley informed the Planning Commission that Mr. Schwertfeger's claims, on his intentions
of his business, are out of line with what he has and continues to do. Ms. Farley believes that
hazardous materials have been increased in huge amounts and are not monitored.
Ms. Farley believed that it is unacceptable for the Commissioners to say they will look into it and
requested a public hearing.
Ms. Farley does not believe that the General Plan can be adopted without further researching the
Schwertfeger's property.
Chair Wilson asked Ms. Farley if she had spoke to the Director of Community and Economic
Development, to be put on the agenda. Ms. Farley requested a formal hearing.
ITEMS:
L MINUTES: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of
December 6, 2007
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PC-09-2008 Vice Chair Addington made a motion
Commissioner Phelps Seconded
l Commissioner Phelps requested that corrections be made on page 3, specifically of L.A.D. be
changed to L.E.D.
After voting, Director Koontz informed the Planning Commission that the vote was two for yes
and two abstaining. Commissioner McNaboe commented that since the meeting was so long ago
she was not sure of the accuracy.
The Commission came to a consensus to continue the item to the next scheduled meeting of May
1, 2008.
MOTION VOTE: 3-0-1-0 Chair Wilson Abstain and Commissioner Comstock
Absent vote continued to May 1,2008
PATRICIA FARLEY
12513 Michigan Street
Ms. Farley has a problem with summarizing the minutes. Ms. Farley believed that the intent of
what she said was not properly stated.
Chair Wilson asked if Ms. Farley would like corrections to be made on what she said. Ms.
Farley could not give the exact words that were said, however; she knew the intent was wrong.
t
2
( Chair Wilson adjourned the Site and Architectural review board and convened the Public
Workshop Session.
1) SUBJECT: General Plan Update
(Revision from the March 20, 2008 Meeting)
Director Koontz gave an overview of the March 201h meeting and informed the Planning
Commission of the revisions that were made. Director Koontz asked the Planning Commission
to comment on the pages that were revised.
Commissioner Phelps had a comment on page V-12
Ontario International Airport is owned and operated by the City of Los Angeles. The
City of Grand Terrace lies beneath one of the primary approach patterns for Ontario
Airport.
Commissioner Phelps wanted to add March AFB and San Bernardino Municipal Airports.
Commissioner Phelps also mentioned a typo on Policy 2.1.4. Vice Chair Addington asked if a
consensus was needed. Director Koontz_confirmed that a consensus was needed. The Planning
Commissioners came to a consensus to make the changes noted by Commissioner Phelps.
* Minutes relating to the General Plan are verbatim.
2) SUBJECT: General Plan Workshop#13
(Housing Element)
Sandra Molina,Senior Planner: I have a power point presentation to briefly go over the
Housing Element. The staff report was provided to the Commission; included the revised
Element. There was also an attachment to that gave more detail in respect to the components of
the Housing Element.
With that, I will go through the presentation quickly and then we could go over any questions
that you may have.
Power Point Presentation
Slide 2 of 29
Back in August of last year, Mr. Koontz provided a workshop on the Housing Element
components. The Housing Element is part of the City's General Plan and it is required to be
updated by State Law. As a matter of fact, all of the cities and counties in Southern California
are currently updating their Housing Element.
The Housing Element is required-to be reviewed by the State of California Housing and
Community Development Department(HCD). They certify the Housing Element. The
certification is a plus in helping with eligibility for grants it also helps us to have control over our
land use decisions.
t
3
Slide 3 of 29
There are a couple of changes in the housing law one is AB 2348 (2004)which establishes
"default-density" of 20 du/ac for lower-income housing. The state will typically want to see that
established when a City cannot demonstrate that there are adequate sites to meet the RHNA
numbers. In some instances, the state was also asking for two properties to be re-zoned.
Slide 4 of 29
Other changes that are recent includes AB 2634 (2006) this requires Housing Elements to
consider the needs of extremely low-income households (30% or less of area median)
Slide 5 of 29
In respect to Regional Housing Needs Assesment(RHNA), it is mandated by the State. To
accommodate our fair share of the region's housing needs our RHNA allocation is 329. That is
how it breaks down in regard to very low, low, moderate and above moderate income
households.
Slide 6 of 29
The table I am going to use are in the Housing Element. This table shows us what the income
limitations are. Just to give you a quick perspective, when you look at very low, low, moderate
households those are the income limits.
Slide 7 of 29
These are hourly wages of the higher income limits within each category. It is a total household
wage, so that would be a one person or two-person household.
Slide 8 of 29
I wanted to run through these to give you a perspective when we talk about those limits
and what the hourly wages are. This is a chart of the 10 Fastest Growing Occupations for our
area. It shows the occupations and the breakdown of their hourly wages.
Slide 9 of 29
These types of occupations are what our community generates.
Slide 10 of 29
The beginning of the Element reviews the required Housing Element programs and policies;
assessment of housing needs; and inventory of resources and constraints. There is also a five-
year program where we have to quantify our housing program.
t
4
The rest of this presentation will focus on the assessment of the housing program and quantified
housing program.
Slide 11-12 of 29 .
Population and employment trends: This table is out to 2030. The year 2000 and 2015 our
population is expected to increase by fifteen percent, household twelve percent and employment
will increase about thirty-two percent. This seems like a significant jump. When you get to the
year 2030, it increases twenty percent.
Director Koontz: Are these SCAG projections?
Senior Planner Molina: Yes
Slide 13 of 29
The City's ethnic composition: the changes as you can see are from 1990 to 2000. The biggest
change you see in this table is in the White/Hispanic populations.
Slide 14 of 29
This shows the age breakdown. It is very comparable to San Bernardino County.
Slide IS.of 29
In Household Composition, again, we are very comparable to San Bernardino.
Slide 16 of 29
This shows that there are 4,221 total family households in the City. Twenty seven hundred are
owner-occupied and the remainder are renter-occupied units.
This is from the 2000 Census, which it breaks down the income categories that the Census uses.
For purposes of our Housing Element in the RHNA we need to go back to those income groups
that they targeted. When you look at this and break it down for our City, we don't have a
significant amount of our population in the lower income categories, as you would find in San
Bernardino County. What you will see later is that the lower households are over paying for
housing.
Slide 19 of 29
This chart shows affordability level for households both owner and renter-occupied. How that is
determined is based on Federal guidelines. If a household is paying more than thirty percent of
their gross income towards their rent or mortgage then they are overpaying.
t
5
Slide 20 of 29
This shows the overpayment of household in the City, including lower income groups. It is
expected that lower-income groups will typically pay more of an income towards housing.
Slide 21.of 29
Part of what we need to do in our Element is look at the constraints to the development of
housing. If you look at market forces and construction cost's it is a big factor. If you look at
what the housing market has done over the last few years,housing cost have really increased.
To give you an idea, in 2007 a fifteen hundred square foot (1,500 sq. ft.) home cost three
hundred and forty five thousand dollars. That is twenty-two percent higher than the maximum
price that moderate-income households should be paying for housing. Another example is
construction cost from 2000 through 2007 have gone from eighty-four dollars a square foot to
two hundred thirty dollars a square foot.
Chair Wilson: That is not entirely accurate. Construction costs are not the only cost that have
gone up substantially. I think it is more of a market influence on the construction cost. If you
want to compare a fifteen hundred square foot over the last fifteen years, the actual construction
cost is about the same for onsite construction. The actual land cost is, and the actual
affordability went way down because they mark.the price of the house up. The"sticks and
bricks"isn't up and that is an interesting twist.
Director Koontz: What I'm hearing about the concrete and raising the prices of everything.
Chair Wilson: About twelve percent difference. At least that is what it has been in the last
thirty-six years I have been doing this.
Senior Planner Molina: The other aspect we need to look at is government constraints in these
areas. Density is an area that the City has more control, more than ability to control then they
would with non-government constraints.
The state looks at density as the higher the density the more encouraging it is for housing
companies to building more housing higher density. The economies of a scale, the more units
you can build on a particular acre the lesser your cost. That is more attractive to builders.
2°d Units is a constraint. Our zoning code requires a Conditional Use Permit(CUP). The law
changed so we do have a program to change that.
Manufactured housing, we have a program in our Element to permit it. Right now, it is only
permitted in one of the residential zones.
Development Impact fees is a big cost. It is about thirty-five thousand dollars toward the permit
r'
-- cost for a single-family home. I suspect that multi-family home would be very similar. We also
6
_ added a program that states if there is an affordable housing project being proposed the City has
the ability to consider helping to assist with impact fees.
Slide 22 of 29
The other thing we do is an inventory of land to determine how many units can be
accommodated. The Element has a table for each residential zone district. This is the last table
that summarizes the results of the residential inventory. This shows that with all the residential
land, we have the ability to accommodate five hundred fifty-three units.
The previous table that was in the first draft of the element, assumed that thirty-five percent of
the units could be affordable. What we did was take it down to the minimum threshold that the
state uses. We thought that it was better to use the minimum so that we could always go up from
that.
Director Koontz: This was based on us going out and identifying every vacant parcel in the
City. We also looked at parcels that were in an R-3 zone. It does not include land where there
would be redevelopment activity.
Chair Wilson: Will this count a parcel that may not be zoned a certain way at this time and
could be rezoned?
- Director Koontz: No. This would only be residentially zoned property.
i
Slide 23 of 29
Senior Planner Molina: We are also required to consider special housing needs. The Housing
Element law requires us to look at the disabled, the elderly, large family households, female-
headed households, farm workers and homeless.
The reason we look at these groups is because they will experience something that hinders their
ability to pay for housing such as being disabled or being on a pension.
Slide 24 of 29
Senior Planner Molina: Our housing program-is required to include goals and policies and
quantify the objectives. We also need to have a schedule of very clear specific programs, identify
the department to implement that programs and a schedule is suppose to be. We have goals and
policies in our Element, program and schedule. It is very specific as to who is going to do it,
what it is and when it is going to be done.
Slide 25 of 29
In the quantified program is we need to go back to the households that RHNA looks at. Because
- we have.to consider extremely low households, what state law says is that you can do the
7
research and determine how many of your households are in the extremely low category or you
can take fifty percent of your very low. What we did was take fifty percent of our very low.
Slide 26 of 29
This table demonstrates that we anticipate we will be able to meet our housing production
numbers. You will have to go back to the rules of the Housing Element to identify the needs and
constraints in your community and establish programs and policies that will encourage and
promote housing development. The RHNA and the Housing Element doesn't mandate that.you
do actual construction; however, every jurisdiction wants to do what they can to meet those
numbers. It is always a balance of how many resources and land that community has to
encourage the developers to come and build affordable housing. Based upon our land inventory
and units that have been approved since 2006, we anticipate that we will meet those numbers.
Director Koontz: On the extremely low (and we don't have any right now) there are seventy-
two that are being constructed in the senior housing project. Some of those units are going to be
in the extremely low category.
Commissioner McNaboe: Can I ask a question about that? (Question is inaudible)
Senior Planner Molina: That representation runs through the components of the Housing
Element. What I suggest is that we continue our workshop and discussion. After this workshop,
our attempt is to get this draft up to the state to have them begin their review of the document.
They will review it and let us know if we are compliant and we will work from there.
Does the Planning Commission have any areas that they would like to go over I am happy to do
that.
Director Koontz: What we discussed at the last housing workshop is that we are expecting
them to come back with this request to zone some land that is twenty units to the acre. We have
the senior project that will cover that but we also talked about whether we wanted to do that. No.
We really don't want to do that right now. Once we get this draft up there we are going to
schedule a visit from their people to come down and discuss it with us. We want them to tell us
where it should go.
If a developer comes in and proposes something, it is always something to consider but I don't
think it is in the City's best interest for us to go out there and try to find a site.
Commissioner Phelps: On the bottom of page VIII-14, table 8.3 (Question is inaudible)
Table 8.3, below, compares population growth and changes in the City of Grand Terrace with
that for the County of San Bernardino for the ten-year period 1990-2000. During that time, the
population in Grand Terrace increased by 6.2%, a very modest rate when compared to the
20.5%population growth experienced by the County overall.
Senior Planner Molina: With the population of the County of San Bernardino.
8
Commissioner Phelps: Okay, that makes more sense.
Director Koontz: If your questions are in relation to minor technicalities can you get it to us at
another time. What we are looking at is if there are questions on the text or the way we.
presented things. The Goals and Policies mimic the ones from the last Housing Element that was
approved. Most of the programs, ongoing programs, are associated with the county or they are
special interest groups. If you compare this to the last Housing Element that was approved it is
very similar. The format has changed a little but it is pretty much the same. There are not a lot
of programs that we can add to this.
Commissioner Phelps: (Question is inaudible).
Planning Secretary Notes: Question is VIII-43, 8.6.2.1 Market Forces
Director Koontz: A lot of problems that we are facing are because these Census numbers are
from 2000, which are out dated. This is a bad time to talk about the numbers because we know
that it is out dated,but it is all that we have to use.
The positive thing is that every city and county in California is facing the same situation.
Commissioner Phelps: This question is on VIII-43, I need some clarification.
Director Koontz: Those are the standard parking requirements. They are assuming that a
typical two-bedroom apartment has two cars in it these days. The typical standard is at least one
space in a garage or a under a carport and one outside.
Commissioner McNaboe: Unless it is the senior center.
Director Koontz: That was part of a specific plan.
Commissioner Phelps: My last question is on VIII-63. Action 11- The City Manager's
Office will continue to offer low interest bond financing and redevelopment tax increment
assistance in.the form of land write down to qualified developers for the construction of mixed
use senior development, with the expectation that at least 50— 75 senior units will be provided
and a requirement that 30% of the units(at least 20)will be affordable to the "very low"
income.
Director Koontz: Essentially, we do split the cost of the land.
Chair Wilson: Is that the formula we use?
Director Koontz: Yes.
Chair Wilson: Do we have a consensus? Is there further discussion?
9
Director Koontz: This is a workshop and a consensus is fine. If you are comfortable with the
direction and changes, we will clean the document up and we will ship it to HCD to get the ball
rolling.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
PATRICIA FARLEY
12513 Michigan Street
Some of these parts are related and I found many mistakes. There are some general things about
the entire plan that I want to say. As you know some of our residents in this City have been
alarmed and concerned on how our City is being managed. We have had difficulty getting
accurate and complete information and documents when questioning what is being done.
Attempts have been made by some City officials and residents to undermine us and make us look
like we don't know or understand the facts. We have documented proof and reason to be
concerned.
I have been accused of being anti-growth, anti-senior center(which is absurd). There are
citizens who are naive and uniformed or are too busy to take the time to investigate what is
happening to our City.
I have been asked what I want; let me tell you what I want. My family's home has been in
Grand Terrace since 1950 and I know things to be facts where others don't know. In addition, I
have seen historical records that prove there have been many problems in how this City has been
managed. Because of how things have been done, citizens as well as City officials have used
different maps and inaccurate information in making important decisions.
I feel that when I raise important issues City officials should consistently be using accurate and
complete documents. Instead, citizens don't get answers or we get answers we know could not
be correct. We have to use up our time and research it ourselves. City officials should be able to
easily locate city documents in a timely-manner, and the documents the City as well as the city
officials believe they are approving and making decisions should be accurate. We should all be
looking at the same maps.
Mr. Schwertfeger's trucking business on Michigan Street is an excellent example. People should
not be relying on someone's opinion or specifically in this case Mr. Schwertfeger's oral and
written statements as opposed to referring to the actual documentation. When important City
documents are approved, there should only be one master copy that is signed and dated. All
members should sign it. I question whether or not all the members got the same maps because
there were so many floating around.
This has frequently not happened when I've researched things. Different maps are given out and
the process has not followed proper procedures. I have been told that people receive things that I
know to be incorrect. Property owners have been led to believed that they have been improperly
informed. Their rights have been violated because they were never given accurate maps or the
10
correct information. Currently the official General Plan Map from 1988 upstairs designates
some people's residential properties as Industrial when it is not.
This map is supposedly the approved one but I am sure that the residents whose land was
changed were not informed of any such proposals nor was my mother informed even though she
lives within three hundred feet. This makes the whole document invalid and illegal. It is
extremely important that our City does accurately complete, officially sign, and date documents.
The inaccurate information in documents as well as mismanagement of City officials and
employees is significantly undermining our City and leaving us vulnerable to manipulative and
dishonest citizens and businesses.
Are you aware that not only do we need.to be aware of Schwertfeger but also we need to know
that there is a huge international industrial business taking over our City and streets? They are
risking the health and welfare of many of our citizens. They are forever damaging the reason
why citizens wanted to be a separate City from Colton. Hammerlift is doing business under what
is supposed to be Mr. Schwertfeger's property.
The New York conglomerate corporation which is the parent company of Wilden Pump has
consolidated all of its pump companies under one umbrella to be headquartered at Wilden Pump.
This is completely unacceptable. Large_businesses like Hammerlift may not help the City
financially because they don't sell the stuff in the City. They damage our City and they don't
take responsibility for the problems that they create.
The Maps have errors and I can tell you the existing Land Use Map.is inaccurate and Mr. Koontz
is responsible for making that up. It should not be included in the proposed draft because some
of the land uses have never been changed. They should not even be existing. The Barton Road
Plan was to include mixed-use and the problem with the Senior Center is before even approving
and having input that is proper and choosing proper areas. It was slapped in and that is very
damaging to the City. It needs to be put together in similar places instead of damaging the
residential areas. That is damaging property values and that is very unfair.
Chair Wilson: Patricia you have to close it out.
Ms.Farley: I want us to prevent us from repeating the same mistake. I am going to point out
that the current Housing Element was never certified because it wasn't right. If you don't have it
certified then that is going to affect money. We have a right to expect this. I can tell you that
there are many areas. The roman numerals are wrong, the sections are wrong.
End of side A
JEFFREY MCCONNELL
Walnut Avenue
I've worked with the City for the last several years. I am glad that they are trying to keep the
quality of life and residential properties in town to a higher quality value. I am glad
Commissioner Phelps that you looked over the plan in detail.
11
I also wanted to point out something that we haven't been following. There were some of the
- things that Patricia Farley was saying may bring awareness to situations like what is going on at
the cement plant on El Rivino Road and Pepper Avenue there is a big lawsuit between the
residents and the cement plant that has to do with air quality and lung cancer. That was one of
our areas of concern with Manhole Builders.
Chair Wilson: I would like to clarify for the public. Mr. McConnell was referring to the recent
AQMD enforcment on a couple of the concrete plants in the area. They are concerned about a
cancer-causing agent that comes from the dust that is omitted from those operations. When the
AQMD steps into the procedure that is a major thing. They have acknowledged it, have started
heading towards fines, and instituted some controls. They are supposed to reduce the amount of
dust they create and monitor the health risk involved. This is a big deal.
Mr.McConnell: I want to point.out that I really enjoy real estate and I want to stand up here
and defend the quality of housing in Grand Terrace.
WILLIAM KAMIN5KY
11818 Burns Avenue
This is more on the planning situation. I used to work for the City of Upland and over there we
found that lots under ten thousand square feet did not sell. In the City of Colton, a motto said
"The City of Gracious Living". The zoning department put a zone on everything that said unless
you have a house that's fits a ten thousand square foot lot or larger, you are not going to build in
this town. They got forced into building some R-7.2's and those sat on the market for three
years. There were only twenty lots and they sat for three years. The ten thousand square foot
lots were gone before they were built.
When we talk about low density and the twenty units, I am wondering if we couldn't have
something that could say this parcel shall be this way and we could mix those up a little.
Chair Wilson: At this point, a good deal of the low income is being met by the senior project.
The very low or extremely low median income and that whole circumstance, what we are going
to do is go out and invite the folks that are responsible for that guideline to come to the City to
make a determination where that fits into our City scheme. Up until this point, we don't see it.
It is very difficult to create that kind of guideline and stick to it if it isn't practical. We are
thinking that we are fitting reasonably into the criteria and that is why we are not prone to zone a
particular plot into the area.
Mr. Kaminsky: I don't see any wonderful benefit in them coming down and saying that you
should do it to here.
Chair Wilson: We have to work through the channels.
Mr. Kaminsky: There was a report in the Riverside Press Enterprise about cost of housing and
you are correct with your numbers.
12
Chair Wilson: I would like staff to address the issue of making sure that the map is accurate.
- How can we do that? This is our chance. We should be able to take a picture now and given all
the technology, it should be fine.
Director Koontz: We have been talking about maps for months now. The map is your map.
Whatever you tell us to put on it we will put it on the map and make that recommendation to City
Council.
Vice Chair Addington: Correct me if I'm wrong all of the maps that we have received were
various drafts and scenarios of what it could be.. You were presenting items to us for
consideration.
Director Koontz: The original map is not changed. There is the current General Plan.
Vice Chair Addington: That one is still in effect. We were just reviewing drafts for
consideration.
Director Koontz: Yes. We are updating the General Plan. Therefore, any changes the Planning
Commission would like to see to the Land Use Map we can discuss. The map is what we think
you want us to move forwarded with. We still need to do the E1R, which I will discuss in a
minute.
,r Chair Wilson: Can we start with the correct understanding of what the actual General Plan map
is today. It may have been legislated but maybe it wasn't depicted correctly in 1988. I want to
make sure that it reflects the legislations that been passed to this date.
Director Koontz: I got to spend most of today digging through the original documents like all
of the General Plan Amendments.(GPA) back to 1981. We trying to draw up a map based on
this resolution and that resolution where it went from this to that. There is a 1984 version of the
General Plan and then another one in 1988. There are individual GPA's requested by different
property owners. We are going through all of that stuff.
Chair Wilson: Okay so you are solidifying the General Plan?
Director Koontz: We are trying to recreate the history of the General Plan Map. I have only
been here since 2002. I can't tell you what happened before 2002 because I was not here.
You and Vice Chair Addington know more of the history of this City than I will ever know. I
would love to sit down and meet with you two to dig through and discuss what was done.
Vice Chair Addington: Gary, I would be happy to meet with you.
Chair Wilson: That sounds like a good plan.
13
Director Koontz: Bear in mind that what we are doing is creating the map. Once that is
- adopted; it doesn't matter what happened in history that is the Plan that we are going to be
working with.
Chair Wilson: If we are going to say that the new map changes to what we want to then we
have to have an understanding of what we have for existing in the areas that are going to remain
the same. That is why we want to make sure that stays accurate. I understand that it is a job
trying to recreate the world.
Director Koontz: This is the Map on the walls behind you. There is a piece of land on Newport
Avenue (a little triangular piece), that piece use to be owned by Victoria Homes. They are not in
business anymore. Their property has gone back to individual investors and banks. That piece
went to a group of investors and they have been coming in to speak to me to figure out what can
be done with this land.
Victoria Homes at one time a couple of years ago submitted a small condominium map. It had
eighteen units on it and we had a lot of problems trying to configure it with the triangular piece
next to the freeway and it is a tough piece.
The current owner by the name of Mr. Urbinsky has asked me to present to you for consideration
his request for that piece. He would like to make that into the Industrial zone because he can't
figure out what to do with it. He is thinking about a mini storage. It is up to you all. Most of it
is going away with the freeway widening. If you don't want to consider it, I can go back and tell
him that.
Vice Chair Addington: To the west of that parcel, is that the mobile home park?
Director Koontz: Yes.
Vice Chair Addington: If I can recall the freeway is dropping. Can that piece be seen from the
freeway?
Director Koontz: It is a few feet above. It is surprising how close it is to grade.
Vice Chair Addington: So it does have visibility?
Director Koontz: From driving the car you can see the property which is an issue because you
will have a noise issue if you were to use it for residential. I suggested that he speak to someone
in the mobile home park to expand where you can put a few pads in the back and leave part of it
as a buffer. His latest thought was to do a mini storage as a holding use until Caltrans buys it
out.
Chair Wilson: It has plenty of frontage, what is the width going to the West?
Director Koontz: There is a frontage but it is tight. The condominium project that was there
showed the back portion of the triangle as open space for park life.
14
Vice Chair Addington: Do you remember what the width is? Is it one hundred feet?
Director Koontz: The way it worked was that he could get a row of condo's along the back and
a couple of condo's along the wide area with drive way and parking between them. It was pretty
tight. We had a problem looking at this because it is a tough piece of land.
If you do elect to make a recommendation for it to go to industrial use he would still have to
come to a public hearing. I have been looking at this piece for six years and I can't figure it out.
Chair Wilson: It is not congruent with the surrounding zoning.
Vice Chair Addington: Is it a remnant parcel from when the freeway went thorough?
Director Koontz: Yes.
Vice Chair Addington: Is the freeway going to wipe the rest of it out?
Director Koontz: When you look at the houses that are close to it and you look at this as an
open piece of land, what do you.expect Caltrans and SANBAG is going to look at for widening?
They are not going to move single-family residences if at all possible.
Vice Chair Addington: True and one advantage he has is if can't do something on it at least get
in entitled and raises the value for Caltrans.
Unknown Woman No. 1: (inaudible)
Chair Wilson: An industrial use there is not going to work. I understand trying to expand the
mobile home in the sliver but often times when a piece like that is purchased they know what it
was. It would be interesting to find out what the history is on the actual value of the property.
There is a good chance that when the freeway went through there they got their value of their
property then. This little sliver really is a single-family unit.
Director Koontz: That is the cleanest thing to do with it. It is zoned for higher density
development so naturally the developer wants R-3 density.
Chair Wilson: I would think that if you would put a house on it that would raise the value the
same. If he is trying to accomplish raising the value then putting a house on that would do that.
I don't see a change to Industrial use.
Vice Chair Addington: Let him submit it and run it through the process.
Director Koontz: What he is asking for as part of the General Plan update that you would
consider putting on the map that part as-Industrial.
Vice Chair Addington: Now that I have that information. I don't agree to that.
15
Commissioner McNaboe: I wouldn't be inclined to do that. I would like to see a compelling
reason and that is not one.
Commissioner Phelps: I think that small lot as Industrial doesn't work.
Director Koontz: I told him he didn't have much of a chance but now I can tell him that you
said no.
The EIR Notice of Preparation is out and we have comments back. We are writing the EIR. We
are kind of in a struggle because there is some trouble with the traffic study modeling.
Chair Wilson: Is it the format?
Director Koontz: It is something about how the traffic engineer gave data to SANBAG and
they run it through there model. The model came back and the numbers don't make sense. We
are having our traffic engineer researching the problem. It is so far off that the nexus study that
SANBAG's got doesn't make sense and it is holding up the completion of the draft because we
need that to make sense. From that, we will do the Air&Noise analysis to complete the EIR.
Hopefully we will have it resolved by next week so that we can get back on track.
Chair Wilson: Do you need anything from us?
Director Koontz: No. I am emailing the traffic consultant and SANBAG about fifteen times a
day.
• Information to Commissioners
Director Koontz: We are struggling with the Town Square project in relation to grading. We
have finally worked with the developer and engineer and we have finally resolved it. We will be
moving forward next week with a notice of preparation and a scoping session. We will get that
out in a few months.
Chair Wilson: When we talk about the Town Square project, for the public, can you tell us
where that is.
Director Koontz: It is this area here. What you are going to see is a couple of different things.
They are proposing the Stater Bros part on this side as Phase I. We also have a master plan
which is very similar to the specific plan. The master plan is for the entire site, which is a
generic document where we will right a program EIR for everything but the Phase I where we
will have detail site plans coming in.
The Grand Crossing Specific Plan is moving forward and on May 14, 2008, we will be having a
community meeting put on by the developer to start accepting community input. We are putting
that in Blue Mountain Outlook, announcing it at City Council, Channel 3 and the City website.
16
Vice Chair Addington: Where will this be held?
Director Koontz: The Community Room at 6:00 p.m.
Chair Wilson: Is this a proposed developer that has offered to do this or is this some kind of
arrangement with the City?
Director Koontz: The City Council has exclusive rights to negotiate and a memorandum of
understanding with Mar Ventures.
Chair Wilson: I would love to see that details of that agreement.
Director Koontz: It is public knowledge.
The third project is the area around the Starbucks building. The owner has acquired all of the
land around it excluding the barbershop. We have been working with him to re develop that
whole area and put together some new stores. The big thing that we have stressed is parking.
The Starbucks building will stay there but a new front face will be applied to match everything
else.
• Information from Commissioners
No information at this time
Chair Wilson: We will adjourn the public workshop and the next meeting will be held on May
1, 2008. I may not be available on that day.
Director Koontz: We probably will not be having a meeting that day.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved By,
, Op
Yoyce0owers, Doug Wilson
Community &Economic Development Director Chairman
For Gary L. Koontz, Planning Director
17