11/03/2005 t i ii. .........
I Community and Economic Development
(ALIf0RNIA Department
22795 Barton Road GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION
Grand Terrace MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
California 92313-5295 November 3, 2005
(909) 824-6621
The regular meetina of the Grand Terrace Planninq Commission was called to order
at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on,
November 3, 2005. at 7:07 p.m., by Chairperson Douq Wilson.
PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairperson
Matthew Addington, Vice Chairperson
Tom Comstock, Commissioner
Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
John Lampe, Associate Planner
Michelle Boustedt, Planning Secretary
ABSENT: Robert Bidney, Commissioner
7:07 P.M. CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Comstock
• Roll Call
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Charles Hornsby
22656 Brentwood Street
Mr. Hornsby wanted to encourage everyone to read the article that was printed in the
October 27th issue of the Grand Terrace City News with regard to the Senior Housing
Project.
Bobbie Forbes
11850 Burns Avenue
Ms. Forbes commented about the ham radio antenna project that is located on Lark Street.
Ms. Forbes wanted to encourage the Commission to drive by the project to see the antenna
which is has been raised. She also wanted to comment that a few of the residents of the
area have put their homes up for sale and will be reporting the effect of the antenna in the
real estate market within the area.
1
ITEMS:
1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 16,
2005
MOTION PC-42-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to approve the minutes of
September 15, 2005
Commissioner Comstock seconded the motion.
MOTION VOTE
PC-42-2005: Approved 4-0-1-0
Commissioner Bidney Absent
3. SA-05-06, E-05-04: Convert an existing single story, 1,325 square foot residence
into an office as well as converting an existing barn, garage and
several out buildings into approximately 3,500 square feet of
material storage warehouses. There will also be approximately
70,000 square feet of outdoor production and outdoor storage.
APPLICANT: Manhole Builders, Inc.
LOCATION: 21712 Vivienda Avenue on a five acre parcel located on the
north side of Vivienda Avenue about 450 feet easterly of
Terrace Road, Assessor's Parcel Number 0275-19-02.
RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing, take testimony, close the Public
Hearing and approve the Resolution for Approval for SA-05-06,
and E-05-04 as recommended by Staff.
Associate Planner Lampe greeted the Commission and presented his staff report. This-
request involves the conversion of an existing single family residence located in the
southwesterly portion of the subject site into an office and the -use of several existing
outbuildings on the property for material storage. The remainder of the property which
consists of about 70,000 square feet will be used for outdoor production and outdoor
storage.
The proposed use of this site is the production of concrete manholes which is a permitted
use in the existing M2 Zoning of the site. The subject site is a five acre parcel located on
the northerly side of Vivienda Avenue about 450 feet easterly of Terrace Avenue. Access
to the site is provided primarily by means of a dirt gravel private driveway of about 20 feet
in width running in the easterly and westerly direction.
This request was originally heard by the Planning Commission in May and June of this
year. On June 19th, the Planning Commission approved this project on a vote of 2-1. The
following meeting of June the 27th, the approval was appealed to the City Council which at
it's meeting of August 25th of this year referred the matter back to the Planning
Commission for a new Public Hearing because of inadequate notice and because the
requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District relative to air quality
issues.
2
The project was re-noticed with a new updated ownership list of all of the property owners
within .300 feet. Notices were sent by first class mail on September the 19th to those
property owners. The Initial Study was revised with new air quality data supplied in part by
an air quality impact analysis report which was prepared by an air quality consultant for the
} applicant.
On October 21, 2005, a letter was received from the Air Quality Management District which
responded that the new initial study met the requirements for the air quality analysis with
the exception of the discussion of carbon monoxide hot spots which by definition occur
when intersections or levels of intersection in the area are impacted. A copy of the letter
was included in the staff report for the Commissioner's review.
Following the October 21, 2005 letter, the staff received a memorandum from the City's
traffic engineer that the level of traffic projected to be generated by this project which is
very limited, will not resolve that any intersection operating in a Level Of Service E or
worse. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is no CO or Carbon Monoxide hot spots
which will come from this project. The Traffic Engineer is present and will answer any
questions that the Commission may have about this issue or any other traffic issues that
may arise.
The remainder of the project is the same as was presented at the other two public hearings
that were held earlier this year before the Commission. To save time, we refer you to the
staff report as to the characteristics of the property.
In addition, to provide some continuity from the earlier two public hearings, we did include
the staff report and petition that was submitted in opposition of this request which was
presented at the June 19, 2005 Public Hearing, and also a letter from Bobbie K. Forbes in
opposition to the proposal. We also included in the Staff Report, the minutes of the May
and June Public Hearings for reference.
Based on the revised initial study that was done with the new air quality information that we
have from the air quality analysis of this project, and also from the comments from the Air
Quality Management District, the project is deemed to qualify for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and will not have an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed
mitigated measures and the recommended Conditions of Approval are included in the
Resolution which is Attachment 28 in the meeting packet.
Since the matter had been presented to the Planning Commission earlier this year, there
have been discussion with staff and the owners of the large parcels in the immediate area
of the subject site including the parcel to the north and the parcel to the immediate west
besides the subject parcel with regard to establishing an assessment district to fund
needed infrastructure of this area for future development. The property owners that were
contacted and have indicated that they have a favorable attitude about the establishment of
an assessment district.
The Commissioners may have noticed that in the recommended Conditions of Approval the
Staff did include the possibility of the assessment district which may be established in'the
near future. However, the amount of time projected to establish the district based on the
fact that we must go through LAFCO will be about 18 to 24 months. We did include that in
the recommendations. In the interim, conditions would be applicable during the initial
period when the assessment district is put into effect.
3
The.Staff is recommending that this project be approved as set forth by the Resolution.
The recommendation is based upon the mandatory findings of the Resolutions together
with the recommended Conditions of Approval. The use is a permitted use in the M2 Zone.
The area has been zoned as M2 for over twenty years. The Ordinance-to re=zone the area
(' to M2 Zoning was adopted by the City Council in September of 1984. Additionally, the Staff
is recommending this project with over 40 separate conditions to eliminate control or
mitigate any potential problems, including environmental issues of this project. Associate
Planner Lampe concluded his presentation.
Chair Wilson opened up the Public Hearing.
Janese Makshanoff
21816 Vivienda Avenue
The back of my house is approximately 10'feet from the subject property. John knows
where. I don't have a problem with the development, but I do have a problem with no
infrastructure. You're going to have maximum weight vehicles coming in and out of the dirt
road and onto Terrace Avenue, and some will end up on Vivienda. I used to work for
Sepulveda Building Materials, and so I know what kind of materials, what kind of trucks.
On their applications for AQMD, the maximum material that can go through those machines
can possibly come out to 17 loads a day. Once raw material comes in, finished product has
to come out. They are not going to keep accumulating it. I just think that no infrastructure
is a bad deal. Thank you.
Rita Schwark
r ° 21952 Grand Terrace Road
I am opposed to the Manhole Builders Company. There are many children that wait for the
bus and come off of the bus, I live on Grand Terrace Road and many semi trucks go
through there for a short cut, I don't know where. Many of them speed early in the morning
and there is no sidewalk for them to walk and there is no curb and gutter and they are three
deep sometime in the street. You can only imagine these trucks going down the street, or
something flying off the trucks and hitting one of these children. This is way too dangerous,
it's a very busy street where I live and you know that trucks are going to take a short cut to
wherever they have to get to get on there. We are already wedged between the freeway
and the noise from Staters, but there's going to be another company in there making noise
and we've got the big power towers out there and we've already got enough on our side of
the freeway in Grand Terrace on the west side. I am concerned for the safety of the
children because there are no sidewalks for them to.walk on for any children that use the
school bus. Even the school bus speeds down Grand Terrace Road very fast. Thank you.
Janet Rich
11701 Terrace Avenue
I will be facing all of that stuff and I don't like it at all and I am not going to like the noise that
it's going to produce, and I'm not going to like all of the cement dust that it's going to
produce. If you say it's not going to produce it, go to some other company that is doing the
same thing. I'm opposed to it. I know its industry, and we fought that 20 years ago. There
is some industry and then there's dirty industry, and to me this is dirty industry.
4
William Kaminsky
11818 Burns Avenue
I live at the intersection of Burns and Vivienda Avenue. I have made an illustration for
everyone to take a look at and it is to scale. These are our streets in the neighborhood. I
don't care what the traffic report says, I've measured the streets themselves. We have an
18 foot wide street north of Stater Brothers on Terrace Avenue. The street on Vivienda is
about 22 feet average. The stated report is 24 feet, but that's out in front of Jerry Guthrie's
place. The remainder of the street is 22 feet wide. And if you can see, by trying to fit one
of these large trucks on there, they don't really fit. In fact, on Terrace Avenue, they will be
overlapping the center line of the property. To give you a little illustration, this is Terrace
Road, I went and popped that out about a month ago. That's how thick that road is, and
that's what you're going to be putting 65,000 pound trucks onto, 18 wheelers. Did you
notice in here that says, that the applicant is only supposed to patch the road. Now, I don't
know what you're going to do with this, but that's not a patch.
Once a year we have a collision. In early May, in front of my place, we had a side swipe. I
collected a tail light because this was a little different this time, because the passenger side
of the-vehicle was the one sideswiped. It's usually the driver's side. And Janice over here
had an incident not too long ago where she had a medical emergency. We had to in the
middle of the night, tell the fella that was driving the van pulling a trailer that he had to stop
and pull over into somebody's driveway so that he can let the fire truck pass by because
that road was not wide enough.
If you look in here it says, Vivienda can be used as an alternate route! I think we are all
familiar with what's going to go on down here on Barton Road. Stater Brothers has already
%- made a commitment and that they are moving. I talked to the City of Colton and the
Engineer, Victor Ortiz gave me his card and told me that they are planning on bridging both
railroads at one time and the whole construction will take about 1 year. So during that one
year, there will be no access to that site except for the Vivienda concrete bridge. That's the
whole setup down there. During that one year, which might seem kind of a small time limit,
that trucks going'to bounce off of the little kids out here because that road is not wide
enough to pass two vehicles at one time, except those small little Toyotas.
This is our main complaint, we need that road widened as like other normal developments
would happen, we need that road on Vivienda upgraded and it has poor site distances.
Now that they have put a fence up there, the traffic report calls for a stop sign. Well the
traffic engineer hasn't been there, because there hasn't been a stop sign there in seven
years. The fence now obscures where the post is, and also the fence obscures seeing just
across there, and it is directly behind the edge of pavement, which is we all know is the
streets and highways code is a bad location because you are just limiting your site
distance. So what we have here plus what was discussed at the last Planning Commission
meeting, we can see that it was not even added to the map that's on the wall there, and
they wanted to widen the road, they wanted to cul-de-sac, and that stuff never got done on
there.
We also discussed the flood control situation and most of these things on page 4 which
says conflict with.environmental plans, this whole area over here currently as stated by the
Circulation Element as residential roads. The only commercial road that is out there is
Barton Road itself. By bringing in this development here, we have violated what the
Circulation Element is.
5
We have also omitted attending to one simple procedure which is flood control. The
Applicant has said that there are no problems. Well, flood control has stated that there are
problems and the City Engineer has adopted the flood controls recommendations. The
Storm Drain Plan 317, in which it says there should be storm drain which is.at the diagonal
line and it is not reflected on this. There is about a 20-25 foot wide easement that is not
reflected on the map and you can't make it half and half because their house is almost
against the property line and that would mean that they would move their house. The full
width of that storm drain has to be put onto the property of Manhole Builders, which is not
legal access for this site. If anybody takes a walk out there, you can see that there are little
tiny roads that go down the slope. These roads are only about 12 feet wide and about 4
feet down the slope. Now I had talked to various departments about widening that road
and they said oh no that looks expensive, no it's not expensive cause you have a shelf off
of the edge of the road, and if you were to go and visit the property, walk it.
In fact, one of the last Planning Commission meetings here, the point was asked had any of
the Planning Commissioners gone out and visited and actually walked the site. One
member had actually gone out there. And I think if you're going to make a judgment, you
have look at the property cause that plat map on the wall does not represent what's going
on out there.
What I think should happen is that this whole project should be sent back to Staff and re-
conditioned and I think the Planning Commission should not vote on it and send it right
back to Staff and let the Staff come up with reasonable conditions which reflects with what
the neighborhood wants to hear.
Michael Simon
21797 Vivienda Avenue
I live directly above the proposed site and I object to what has so far been offered and I am
appreciative to Planning's approval of the recommendations, but it's just not good enough.
The structure is not there. Heading down the road towards their site is maybe an 18 foot
wide road in most parts with a ravine on both sides. I extend my arms to any of the
Commissioners they can come over, and I will give them my truck with a 20 foot trailer at 8
feet wide, and we will go ahead and take this up and down these roads with cars coming in
and out, and there's no way that you can get a diesel with a single trailer no more a double
trailer to go in and out without having problems with other vehicles. And then your coming
off a 18 foot wide paved road onto a 15 foot wide gravel road, the access for these big rigs
to come in and out on a daily basis one after another is not suitable.
understand that we have our traffic control guys here, and I don't know that if they have
actually gone out and assessed the actual roads that they will be using.
My next thought is we actually need to adopt any business that's going to go in there. We
need to adopt an actual street with an actual address for this parcel. Having an address of
Vivienda Avenue is too confusing for paramedics, fire, delivery truck drivers, employees,
the Sun Newspaper. I'm sure if these people asked for the Sun Newspaper, these people
would be delivering in my front yard.
I'm trying not to repeat what other people are going to say and I'm going to leave some
room for other people to go ahead and give their comments. I appreciate your input and
we'll see what we can do.
6
Bobbie Forbes
11850 Burns Avenue
I was hoping to speak after the presentation so my notes are short at this time. One of my
biggest concerns is the air quality for the neighborhood as well as the rest of the
- community. When the fires hit last year, the dust, dirt, fire and ash that came through the
community it was, everywhere in town, and we were hit very hard on that bluff. It didn't
matter if you washed your car, it still was there. I think that the dust from the Manhole plant
is going to be similar and I don't know how it will settle but I think it will be similar. It will go
through the whole town and not just right there. And in the summer time when it's really hot
and the wind blows, Grand Terrace is so fortunate to get that afternoon breeze, we're going
to get that dust up into our neighborhood and across the freeway and toward where the
elementary and the play yard is. That dirt is going to go that way through the whole town.
We're up on the bluff. We all like living here because in the summer we get the breeze.
Cooley Ranch is 5 to 7 degrees hotter in the summertime than Grand Terrace. That dirt is
going to come up into the town and it's going to go up to your homes too, all through the
town and into Blue Mountain so it's not just over where we live.
I think this is a tremendous turnout for such a small neighborhood, so I'm proud of all of the
people here and I thank them for taking the time to come out and speak before the panel.
Thank you.
Charles Hornsby
22656 Brentwood Street
When I went to see the job site, and understood what the project was, I thought it was
inappropriate and I also think that it's probably inappropriate for anywhere in town. That's
what I think the Commission should consider. Not whether you can do what your about to
do legally, but whether it's appropriate to do. And now I'm going to make a pretty
controversial statement and I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings, but I don't think you
guys would be considering this unless it was west of the freeway. I'm east of the freeway
and I'm a citizen and resident of Grand Terrace but so are all of these people behind me
and I think that the Planning Commission and the City Council kind of considers people that
live west of the freeway wicked step children.
Chair Wilson replied to Mr. Hornsby's statement: I've been on this Planning Commission
for fourteen years. There is not a part of this City that I don't know about. We've
considered a lot of different uses all over this City and in fact, I was part of the General Plan
Task force, so I am pretty aware of what's happening within the City, and I don't think we've
ever shown favoritism in this body in the various members that I have seen, and you are
entitled to that opinion.
Cynthia Bidney
12219 Pascal
I wanted to bring to your attention some of the information and research that I have been
doing on some of the pollutants in our area and where we stand with the rest of the United
States. The fact that our area of San Bernardino County rates 80-90% higher than
everybody else.
Environmental releases in our area in toxins and carcinogens are 80-90%. Developmental
toxins are at 90-100% in our area. If you helped with the General Plan then you also know
7
that we are in between two major pollutants in Riverside and San Bernardino. I don't
believe that our City can stand any more pollutants.
have also prepared for you a list of the major polluters in our area, and the.top polluters
are a cement plant. The major polluters are cement plants and I have also prepared a list
of carcinogens. You can go to the website yourself and you can find out what diseases
these carcinogens do contribute to besides respiratory cancer and the fact that these
carcinogens make people sick, I would not want to see any more within our City.
Increasing the amount of diesel trucks and pollutants within our town is also in this website,
and you can do the research yourself.
Daniel Berliner
22624 Brentwood Street
I also am opposed to this project and I also don't live anywhere near it. I didn't realize what
went on in this City even though I have lived here for 19 years, until recently the Planning
Commission very carefully notified us as close to the day as possible that you were going
to build a three story building behind our homes. I have gotten a little bit more involved
since then, and that's why I am here tonight because I know that most of the citizens here
of the City of Grand Terrace have no clue what's going on here, and I think it's done
because the people aren't notified as much as they should be.
Your responsibility is to look out for the good of the City of Grand Terrace, and from what
see, that's not being done. I cannot believe that there is any need or requirement to put
industrial manufacturing in the City of Grand Terrace. We do need commercial
development, we need to grow, there is no question about that, but there is no need for
industrial manufacturing. Again, from what I have seen with you guys, the City Manager,
who I'm sorry is not here tonight as well as the City Council, I think you guys do what you
want, and I think it's even here, it's already approved, it says it's already approved. Now if
we used the rules that we used for the apartment complex, so far I have not heard anybody
for this, we used the rules for apartment complex that were more for than against. Now
could stand here that nobody ever told you that they were going to build a cement plant
behind your house and gee, that's too bad. That's life, because that's the kind of garbage
we got from the people who don't live anywhere near where that apartment complex is
going in so I strongly recommend that you turn this project down. I'm sure that there's got
to be better uses for that property other than industrial development. Thank you very much.
Frank O. Tetley-Attorney for Opposition
am representing 15 families in the area. I would like to indicate that my business address
is in Riverside, but I moved to the Terrace in 1957. In fact, I was on the Planning
Commission and we then made this land what it is today. I was a Chairman of the Planning
Commission when we first became a City. I say that not to brag but to compliment you. I
have a small sense of what a difficult a job is that you all do and we were volunteers. I
don't know whether they give you some kind of a small stipend, I'm sure whatever it is, if
anything, it doesn't accomplish what you really do.
(Frank Tetley gave a slide presentation at this time with regard to the subject
property, including the surrounding streets).
That is then end of the picture presentation, and I wanted to give you some sense of what's
actually happening down there. Legally, I don't know why we are having this discussion.
8
Your own attorney and I agree with his analysis 110 percent, indicates to you that the
Manhole Builders do not have legal access to do what they intend to do. All they can do
now is have a residential use of that easement, and I hope you all have paid attention to
the letter that was quoted in the initial summary and more particularly your Attachment Four
Which is from your own attorney as applicable to the Manhole Builders project, it would
seem to be difficult to conclude that the limited residential use of a dirt road has resulted in
the acquisition of a roadway for more industrial purposes. Of course, to be refreshed, you
can only use the easement that has been in existence. This easement to the west is
residential. Unless Manhole Builders has somehow bought the right to have an easement
across his property, this discussion is academic. They cannot use anything but normal
residential use of that easement and these roads that I just showed you are clearly for
residential use. The other thing I wanted to mention was on your Attachment 8, again, that
residential purposes. Your Attachment Nine, the second page it requires from the fire
department a turnaround. I don't know where they are going .to get the turnaround from,
unless they do it on their own property, and you have not called for it here. I am not trying
make anything up or cause any problems. It also has on the second page, a street sign.
The project is required to have an approved street sign. The street sign shall be installed
on the nearest street corner of the project. Installation of the sign shall .be prior to any
combustible material being placed. Who gets to name that dirt road? What are you going
to call that? The address is Vivienda. So how does a fire truck or an emergency vehicle
respond? We can't meet this unless somebody gets to name it, but seriously folks, your
own fire department is requiring a turnaround and a sign, neither one of which is in your
plan. and neither one of which I don't think you can do, you can't name an easement, it just
isn't a street. I will ignore your comments about paving the road. Cause he can only pave
his part but he can't pave the.gentleman's next to his. So I don't know how he gets access.
One other thing that I didn't forget is the fact basis upon which the conclusion is being
' drawn of traffic going in and out. I just don't see it. I don't know what numbers they have
used. ' We been given different numbers than they have. I noticed that on page two of
Attachment 15, from the AQMD, they also did not find the statistical basis upon which you
as the lead agency for determining, let's see the quote is 'does not even include a
summarized finding by the lead agency of the levels of service in volume to capacity ratio
and impacts with the affected project intersections', etc. So I don't know what numbers your
using. I certainly don't believe that the initial presentation that I read about earlier on was
going to be one or two trucks bringing their product in and one or two trucks bringing the
material. I don't believe that.
I'll summarize. My concerns about the Negative Declaration as your Attachment 21, on
page two, I think transportation circulation should have been check, air quality should have
been checked and maybe noise should have been checked in terms of environmental
factors, and I believe that it should have been that I find that a proposed project may have a
significant effect on the environment and the environmental impact report should have been
required.
On page four, has already been commented upon. You do have conflicts with your own
internal rules and regulations, and that is you have an adopted Circulation Element, and if
you approve this plan, it appears to me that you will not be compliance with your own
adopted Circulation Element. Terrace Road is not an adequate legal truck route. It has
already been commented on as a flood control plan, and I don't see enough information
! here. I have business card and some hand written notes at the bottom and then summary
charts, but there is no actual analysis in this report that I can find about the flooding issue.
What we have is some statistical stuff.
9
And then, I am shocked, on page 15 of the negative recommendation, it says that
'increased vehicle trips for traffic congestion' and the box is checked, no impact. How can it
possibly be that there is no impact on the traffic or congestion. Hazards from design
features, sharp curves and dangerous intersections, now that one is checked. Potentially
significant unless mitigation is incorporated. Haven't heard how we are going to get rid of
those blind intersections or what to do when those trucks end up on those city streets.
And the last one I have is about the actual manufacturing which is on your negative impact
recommendation, and that it comments that the process includes the mixing of concrete,
the movement of product to storage areas using forklifts and the transportation of incoming
And outgoing products using heavy duty diesel trucks. These uses have the potential to.
generate significant noise levels. The General Plan allows from 45 to 65 and my concern is
that you are allowing 65 from 7 am in the morning, until 8 pm at night, Monday through
Saturday, and two of my clients are within 150 yards, that's where they live and that's
where they raise their children. One of them has a 79 year old parent living in the house
which is right along the property line, and we're going to have.this kind of noise and dust. I
appreciate your time.
John Odenbaugh
21811 Vivienda
It's hard to follow that guy. He just said it and showed it all. I work for the maintenance
department for the Colton School District and for sixteen years, it has been my
responsibility to provide a safe environment for the kids of the district, including the children
in this City. I believe your jobs are similar to mine. These are my kids, all three of them.
_ Regardless of your zoning rules and your impact reports, they still will be exposed to
cement dust and other pollutants including diesel fumes, every day. I live less than 100 feet
from this property, and I don't believe that it is going to be a very healthy environment for
my kids to grow in. Now I work hard to give the kids in this City a safe place to go to
school. I hope you do the right thing by keeping them healthy while they are in their own
neighborhood. Thank you.
Shawna Padilla
21797 Vivienda
These are my neighbors. The number one complaint is the cement dust. Like Bobbie
Forbes was saying, once that breeze comes in everyday, and it's going to bring up all of
that dust. Now, on our street we have a total of three here next to. my house, and there's
three more next to that children ranging from two to twelve. Next to me, the middle child
who is eight, she has asthma, she has severe asthma and she gets hospitalized for this.
That-cement dust is going to make her go to the hospital more than she should and it hurts
because I consider these people my family. And another thing, about the fire department.
Whenever you see a fire truck going by, we have to stop them to tell them they live down
there, because our addresses are on Vivienda, they don't know where to go and whenever
we do direct them down there, the fire trucks get stuck in the dirt down there. It's just so
unsafe, I just don't want this company down there cause it's just going to cause problems
for our families and homes. We are going to be breathing in all of this dust, and who knows
what's going to happen down there, so please don't let this go on. Not in our
neighborhoods and not in anyone in Grand Terrace's neighborhood cause it's just going to
be bad for all of us. Thank you.
10
Edward A. Giroux
21891 Vivienda
My -property borders the railroad tracks near the private spur that goes over the concrete
bridge. We are the second house house west of Grand Terrace Road and Vivienda. I
have two concerns, the traffic, you have heard a lot about the traffic. The trucks are not
being able to handle that road. Vivienda itself in front of these folks home; I run through
there and you can start seeing it's dropping. The road on the outside is giving out and the
asphalt is dropping. It's probably dropping close to a half inch every year I've noticed over
the passed 3 years. The dust issue. I don't care what the west coast people tell you. I live
there, I sit on our front porch and I look out over this valley and you can see the stuff
coming from the concrete plant in Colton coming into our neighborhood. I have switched
out all the windows in my house both for energy serving purposes and to reduce dust. The
primary reason I wanted to reduce the dust, is because my step son and my wife are very
affected by dust. It causes them to have respiratory problems. And even by putting dual
pane windows where I live, and especially when a breeze kicks up and Grand Terrace feels
a 10 mile an hour wind, we get it at 25-30 mile an hour wind because it's a funnel coming
through here, so all we.are going to be for Grand Terrace on the west side is a filter before
that dust hits the east side. I don't want my wife and step son to have to put with that. That
dust is going to be an extreme-problem. And the second problem is going to be the traffic.
There's no way that Vivienda or Terrace Road will be able to handle that truck traffic. Thank
you.
Jerry Guthrie
21769 Vivienda Avenue
In the pictures of the bluff, my house was the first picture in that scenario. . I am trying to
compose myself but I am having a hard time that the City would even consider doing this to
our little neighborhood: You know, our neighborhood was first, then the City comes in and
changes the zoning from agricultural down below us, where we used to have horses, and
now it's M1. How can you put M1 right up against a residential neighborhood. Now, you
call it agricultural, but that's just semantics, it's a neighborhood but you can't deny it.
Are you going to make us breathe the dust six days a week? Every day that wind blows.
You want to know what a hurricane will do. I mean, sixty five mile an hour winds, and it's
going to come straight up into our house, it's bad enough having the Santa Ana River but I
don't think we can do anything about that. But for goodness sakes you can't do this to our
neighborhood, you know we were first and I hope that.the City will see it that way. I have a
little document here, that's dated on October 21. Ironically, this is from Gary Koontz, and in
this scenario we have approved for the project to proceed, but out of the blue, here comes
on October 27th, they changed their mind, they don't have an application for permit for
concrete batch equipment and they don't have a permit..for a cement storage site. This
project is not ready. It's not ready.for our neighborhood and you are public servants, and I
hope you do the right thing, cause we are people on the other side of town. Thank you.
Warner Hodgen-La Sierra Holdings
San Bernardino
It is a pleasure to stand before the Commission and the audience. I spoke before the
Commission at the June 16th meeting and was asked many questions relative to. the
particular area, the reason being that my Sons own 30 acres just north of the Manhole
Builders and is by far the largest owner, and I brought up at that time, that I felt that a plan
11
could be done to incorporate all improved streets clear down to Barton Road. I have met
and talked with many of the. neighbors and spent significant time with Jeff McConnell
relative to this issue, even had a preliminary plan and took him out and went around the
neighborhood and figured out how this plan could work.
I had committed to the Commission and also to the City Manager and Staff, Gary Koontz
and John that my family would go ahead and expend the capital to do an overall plan. I
have written an overview of this, I can never do it in three minutes and have made copies to
give you people and have made a large drawing which depicts how this road system could
work. I say extemporaneously, that I have no quarrel with anything that I have heard so far
today, I think the roads are intolerable and I only stand before with a solution that makes
them tolerable with appropriate landscaping and with long term standards of maintenance
as well as a maintenance district. If I could take,longer than three minutes to make my
points. Could I pass out what I, or do I do it later?
Chair Wilson:'That's fine. Pass those on to Madame Clerk. Please state your name and
address for the record.
My name is Warner Hogeden. I was born 73 years ago in the City of Colton just down the
street here. I live in San Bernardino and I have lived here all of my life. My family came
here in 1857. My Great Grandfather is referred to as the Father of San Bernardino County.
He bought Rancho San Bernardino, so I can't be here any longer than that. I hope that
answered the citizen's question.
(Mr. Hogden passed out a 7 page memo addressed to Gary Koontz and the Planning
Commission with regard to a cooperative agreement for Street Improvement
assessment district and landscape maintenance agreement for Grand Terrace
Redevelopment Area).
I would be more than happy to answer any questions from the audience or from you
people. I do not speak here for Manhole Builders, but I agree with anybody that's got eyes
and with everyone here that has spoken, the streets are deplorable. All of the street
sections are on the overall plan. There will be a full sheet with standards, street lights
included, water, sewer, all utilities, landscaping, trees, and the size of the trees as was
indicated so that you don't put a seed down there and wait for it to grow.
Incidentally I did want to give a clarification that was very well.pointed out by the Counsel
with regard to the photo log. When you get up to Barton Road to turn right, especially in a
car, you can't see. So we evaluated that any by taking back the curb and the sidewalk
section along Stater Bros. going back about 400 feet, you can shift Terrace Avenue to the
east. This allows the full course standard right had turn rlane without going into the south
lane or the eastbound traffic of Barton road to turn right. I am also aware and it's in my
other documentation, and I have provided copies thereof, about the new bridge going in
just east of Stater Bros., and complete new signalization and La Cadena and Barton Road
being done in a joint participation between the City of Grand Terrace, City of Colton, and
the County of San Bernardino to handle that traffic. During the construction of that bridge in
the interim period, you would just go south on Terrace Avenue, it goes south, turns back
around and then come back up to Barton Road again, all of that traffic circulation would be
turned south, therefore, not reaching into the neighborhood areas.
I honestly believe that with the full width streets, all of Terrace Avenue, the correct
intersection at Vivienda Avenue with new guard rails along Vivienda and with new guard
12
rails, and also it would be widened. The gentleman that spoke earlier was absolutely
correct, there's only about 17 or .18 feet of pavement, it would be expanded under this plan
to over 30 feet with sidewalk, street lights and landscaping including the west side Maple
Street and the north side of Walnut Avenue.
` - With the proper signage, etc., and the threat of God, I do not see trucks going into the
neighborhood areas with the exception there was an emergency or something where you
couldn't drive down. They also mentioned something about the water, at the underpass, it's
terrible, I have even raised cattle and horses down there myself over 30 years ago. That
channel has been blocked up just because it hasn't been cleaned, and part of this
improvement district, the new channel would be properly constructed all inclusively and
eliminate the flooding and mud problem that exists there at this particular time.
Thank you for your time and for their time. I hope that I made it clear where I live, and
maybe I—should move to Grand Terrace. If anybody has questions, I would be more than
happy to. I am standing here with money, marbles and chalk and would be more than
happy to answer any questions.
think the people from Manhole Builders are a hard working family, and from naivety,
bought the property, paid too much for it, at $750,000, they are stuck. I feel sorry for them.
We've all worked hard, I know I have. The only thing I know is my tail in the air and my
head in the ditch. All my life I am still that way, but not broke.
But anyway, the timetable. Yes. I mentioned in here 60 days. If we all enter into a
cooperative agreement. All inclusively, the property owners. I have talked to Mr. Houston
who owns five acres to the south, I've talked to Kevin Davis and also the Manhole People. -1
have talked to the Allen's, I believe that it is the correct name and the Rich's they would be
part of the district but with no assessment whatsoever. I volunteer to do this because that
is what I have done all of my life. So I think that it could be done within 60 days with
everyone's cooperation. Then we would go through the process of the formation of the
district and get the plans completed and go out to bid, etc.
The reason that the City brought up the assessment district is because the smaller people
cannot afford to put in the improvements and pay for them all up front, so we agreed to be
part of the assessment agreement. Normally, we do not do that because it costs longer
over time, just like interest on your house. But nevertheless, -when I spoke with the Rich's
and also the Allen's I realize that I have been there for 40 years, and it's a residential use,
but nevertheless, since 1984 they have been M2 zoned and they are getting older. Some
day they want to sell and I think that they can sell at a better value as the M2 which it is
zoned that this particular time and with proper access including fire truck required radius
per the fire department down at the end. So my experience is this: Keep your shoulders up
against the wall and keep pushing and getting things done which I am willing to do, and it
could be accomplished in maybe 18-24 months. It can't be done quicker. Anyway, that is
the time table.
Lisa Franklin
21779 Vivienda Avenue
I have two children, a six year old son named Shaun and two year old daughter named
Lela. The pollution would be coming from this plant would be affecting my children and
they run around and play outside every day and I don't think they should be taking in this
kind of pollution, and if you feel that it's safe for my children, I am more than happy to have
13
your children or your grandchildren come over and play in my front yard and play out front
where there's big trucks that will be rolling by and, shortcutting through to get where they
are and breathe all of this wonderful dust that you want to bring to our neighborhood and if
you feel that it is fine, I will baby-sit your kids all day for free, six days a week whenever you
want and you could bring your children over and they can come and experience what my
children are going to. Thank you.
Terri Halstead
21758 Walnut Avenue
Our property is Maple and Walnut corner. The biggest thing I want to talk about is the
possible health impact. Just having a look of what things are inside of cement that are
going to be mixed up and the way I see our project now, these things are going to be mixed
up outdoors without any building. So the kind of things that we are going to be subject to
and the children and the people in our neighborhood is lime, crystalline silica and also
chromium. Chromium can cause allergic reactions in some people. The crystalline silica
causes serious lung disease and the lime is corrosive. So those are some of the things
that are endangering us from a physical level. We already have over the top pollution in
our neck of the woods, we have a grandfathered in the Stater Bros. warehouse where they
can go way passed the EPA standards for carcinogenic and for particular matter is what air
quality control will come and measure. When you worked with air quality control did they
go to a similar Manhole and run a little test equipment to see what kind of particulates are
coming say 10 feet away. All you guys are talking about is the diesel and the cars,diesel
and I think that air quality control people should also take a look at what's getting impacted
if this thing is outdoors the way it is now. I feel sorry for you guys, I know what its like trying
to bring in development, my Dad was mayor for 18 years in San Bernardino, and I know
what its like to try to bring in development in but the environment here is so bad and I am a
little bit shocked how you guys can move so quickly. I would be more satisfied if it was
enclosed and with some kind of filters that would mean that none,of the air exhaling out of
there would be full of these pollutants. And so that's my biggest gripe and of course I agree
with everybody about the roads. So I am hoping that when Sater Bros. leaves that Colton
doesn't try to do some tricky little thing and grandfather someone else in there, because I
have to take black dust off of the tops of my dressers, it's not brown dust, it's black. Okay
thanks.
Stacey Jaureguy-Applicant
5021 Stone Avenue -Riverside
represent the Manhole Builders as the project coordinator. We are here today to
recommend that you once again approve this project as outlined in the City's Resolution.
Due to the complaints by the residents, had brought on the need to have further studies
done in relation to our proposed project, and have only verified that our project falls well'
below any agency's maximum allowances. To illustrate this, one of the latest delays that
was brought on by the residents, they were calling the air quality management board
complaining about the impact that they felt that our project was going to bring to the
neighborhood.
At that point, we had already gone through the application process and we had gotten our
permits for the silo and cement batch and all of the issues there. So it really wasn't their
normal procedure to require for us to do an air quality analysis, which you know has been
done. Normally, this is requested before any permits are issued for business that they
would see as a potential threat to the environment, which we were not viewed as.
14
They understand what type of business we run, so when we called and spoke with a
planning supervisor, who requested the study, he was actually very apologetic for making
us go through what we did, because he said that it wasn't because of their concern over our
project, but they had to appease the residents. So we went ahead and did the air quality
study as was requested. As you can see by the report from Giroux and Associates, this
study once again verified earlier conclusions that our project is at the bottom end of their air
quality maximum allowances, alleviating any need for health concerns on the part of the
residents even though they do not seem to believe that.
A comment was made by one of the residents about us not having permits, and because of
this paperwork having to be redone, our permits were pulled until the planning department
got their paperwork back and we will be re-issued our permits, we actually benefit from that
because we have been paying for permits that we have not been using up until now. So
that's not an issue.
As far as the issues raised in the application for appeal, which again focus on the air and
water, and road conditions of the project, these have been repeatedly reviewed by the
necessary agencies and their findings remain consistent. We fall well below any levels of
concern on the part of all agencies. These facts cannot be pushed aside just because it
has become an emotional issue for some of the community and it is really shame that some
people have circulated misinformation in order to try to promote opposition to our project.
But I suppose that's just freedom of speech because none of the claims have been
accurate.
We hope that it is understood that we are not asking to run a business in an inappropriate
zoning and that's according to the City's own planning development code. Nor are we
asking for any special considerations from the City to do anything outside the municipal
codes of the city. Rather we have gone out of our way to work with all agencies involved in
order to comply with any requirements as well as kindly and patiently dealt with any
concerns the residents have had over our project.
As property owners, we know that you understand our legal rights to use this property in a
way consistent with city codes and zoning, even as Vice Chair Addington had
acknowledged at the last Planning Commission meeting. I know some comments have
been made about the dust and the paving. That's part of the conditions. In fact, that is part
of the conditions put upon us at the last planning commission meeting that it was going to
be paved, so I don't understand why these comments keep coming up. I am also
concerned that with-the no trespassing sign on our property that an attorney would see that
and go on our property. I think that's kind of strange, but obviously the property isn't being
improved yet as we are waiting approval from the City.
As far as the turnaround, that is something that was also mentioned, we are working with
the County Fire Department with. When we were designing our parking lot area, we
reviewed with them what size it needed to be in order to have a turnaround on our property
so that they can have access to our building, so that has already from the beginning been
put into our plans. As far as the route of trucks I think Mr. Hodgden I think has adequately
mentioned that just like I did at the last planning commission meeting that there is an
f alternate route and so therefore we are asking that you confirm what your own city has
outlined as an allowed use in the zoning and give approval to this project. Thank you.
Chair Wilson: does anyone have any questions to the applicant at this time.
15
Vice Chair Addington: I would like to hold my questions until the end of the public hearing
please.
Chair Wilson: We do have two more additional request to speak forms.
Katie Guthrie
21769 Vivienda Avenue
We don't want manhole covers in our neighborhood. I don't think anybody in this town
would want them for neighbors. It is 6 am to 7pm six days a week. Dust, noise, and
fumes. That's all I have to say.
Jeffrey McConnell
21758 Walnut Avenue
I stood at this podium more than once supporting the Planning Commission as well as the
City Council and Staff and the master planned proposed developments and each time I
recall some of the people before me tonight as well as the Council say that master plan is
what we want in Grand Terrace.
What Grand Terrace doesn't want is hodge podge development. I even put in an article on
the Blue Mountain Outlook after you folks approved it. I also heard from the Commission
as well as the Council that there are very few vacant parcels left in Grand Terrace and it is
very important to make sure that we use these parcels to the highest and best use for
generations to come.
Sustainable development is a word that the City has used more than once to describe their
intent. So what's going on?
This proposed outdoor development concrete products plant, production and storage is
pure 100% unadulterated USDA Choice hodge podge development with no artificial
ingredients added. This is pure hodge podge development.
Now this proposed master plan from Mr. Hogden is the answer so far to our complaints.
This particular Manhole Builders is not sustainable development, it is dirty and dangerous
development. Why is the City Staff and the Commission letting this at least go through
without at least putting in, an enclosed building. Pave the storage area like you saw on
some of our displays. Al's Garden Art is smaller than this project, and that's all enclosed.
They have a similar sized Machine that the Manhole's proposing to use and it is enclosed.
All of the storage is paved. The lumber yard an the plumbing yard next door to me is
paved. They are proposing gravel_, why are they proposal gravel, because they don't have
the money to pave, but they don't want to put up the money. How are they going to clean
the gravel? In a few years it will be dust. All everyone talks about is dust.
don't know why some of you voted in favor of this dirty development last time we were
here. You're letting down the people of Grand Terrace that you have sworn to help and
protect. Would you put this next to your home or your neighbor's home. Would you put this
next to your church, Mr. Comstock, or relatives or a friends home. How about a City
Councilman's home. How about next the proposed high school's football field, it is zoned
exactly the same as this project. Kids out there playing and exercising just like in our
neighborhood, there are kids playing and exercising, and breathing cement dust.
16
Dodging the wayward big rigs that are fed up with the Barton Road freeway. Believe me I
took pictures of those trucks driving around town and they are always stopping. Half of
them are lost, half of them are from the plumbing yard and if this goes through it is setting
c precedence for more types of developments and more big rigs driving through our
neighborhood cause their fed up with the Barton Road freeway.
How many people have to die before they put up stop signs and traffic control? I haven't
seen any control mitigation here. Vivienda is alternative route and I do not see any traffic
mitigation. Stop signs, speed bumps, anything. How many law suits will the City endure
before it sinks with the definition of clean sustainable development really means. This is the
future of Grand Terrace.
Warner Hogden proposal of a proposed assessment district plan I think is a great idea like I
said, and I have stood here with you folks and have said master plan and we don't have
many parcels left. If your going to do it, your going to do it right. I've told all of these people
many times and everyone at all of the other meetings, that it's going to get.developed you
need to out your input in so it's developed right so it's clean and friendly so our children and
the future of Grand Terrace will look back and say at least they did it right and they didn't
put any dirty development in.
As far as this plan is concerned today, it is still a private entrepreneur's plan or proposal.
Just like the east bridge on Barton Road is a proposal from a County Agency that was
proposed five years ago and we are still waiting for :it, and don't know when it's going to
happen. I talked to Jerry Glander before he left and took off to Hawaii and he's retired, and .
got out of dodge. He didn't know what is going to happen, and every time I have checked
l in every year for the last four years, he says, 'I don't know what's going to happen.' So how
many years of false promises is it going to take to pacify the peasants until it comes into
fruition? I hope it happens soon all at once and not hodge podge.
The landscaping services company, CLS. Mr. Kevin Davis, I spoke with him a couple of
days ago, and I speak with him quite regularly. A couple of days ago, he's told me that he
has had many conversations with Stacey from Manhole Builders and have tried to come to
amends about access acrossed the property. As of the last conversation with them, he
says that he has not granted access to them and is not going to grant access to them until
they come to a settlement. He has offered them different types of opportunities but Stacey
has turned each one of them down. So as of today, they still do not have legal access for
Manhole Builders except on Vivienda Avenue. It doesn't exist on Vivienda.
A couple of weeks ago a Commissioner had told Bobbie Forbes and I to bring lots of
people for another reason as you have heard before the Council before you and .said that
numbers help, it makes a difference, bring lots of people and I think that I have helped bring
lots of people here tonight.
Protect us. At the very least enclose the building, pave the parking lot, storage area, just
like Jensen and Al's Garden Art in Colton. Misinformation I heard from Stacey. Our attorney
did not go onto the property. At AQMD they talk about permits for the silo machine, it
doesn't talk about all of the yard. The storage facility what it's going to look like after they
- drive over it in a couple of years, a couple of months, whatever.
So they don't have access, we need more mitigated measures to protect the environment,
the children. AQMD pulled their permits. They are violating the circulation element
17
according to an engineer in the audience. I think, it needs to go back to staff for more
detailed review so we don't want any appearances of a proprietary. Thank you very much.
Bob Bischoff
21951 Grand Terrace Road
I agree with rriy neighbors here. I agree that you need to develop in your community. In
my career I have done a lot of inspections on different businesses and you need to put one
forth that you can be,proud of. And what you have now as far as what I have seen and
what little information that I have got, this is not one that your going to be proud of. Put it in
a building. Make sure you have concrete where your not stirring up dust 24/7. Do yourself
a favor and put a business in that you can be proud of. This-can be a business that you
can be proud of, but not on gravel and dirt where it's producing dust and dirt 24/7. Thank
you.
Carol Bischoff
21953 Grand Terrace Road
That was my husband. I just want to say for the record too that I also agree. We own the
property now and we're here kind of representing our renters. I grew up in Grand Terrace
and I rode my horse around here. I saw development come I saw improvements and I saw
things that were not an improvement. I just can't believe that you are doing this to our little
town. This does not'seem like an improvement to me and it makes me sad. I do think you
guys need to think about if this was going through your front yard, and everything else has
been said, so thank you very much.
Judy Harrison
*-- 21951 Grand Terrace Road
am one of their tenants out of three. These are my fellow neighbors. Nothing's been said
too much about concern about the traffic on Grand Terrace Road. Are you aware of how
much diesel traffic that is, on that road? I have timed it myself, in 20 minutes on a Saturday
morning at a quarter to eight till a little after eight before I go to the office and there's twelve
deep. On a night like tonight, there is at least 8-12 within a 20 minute period. This is
depending on what time of the day. I have very much concern for the safety of the children.
We have three bus stops between Barton Road and the proposed project and] believe that
there is other areas in San Bernardino County that would, love to have this business.
There's a quarry out in Highland, and I believe that that's.the type of area these people
need-to be in. I am opposed and I am concerned for the safety of children and my health.
Thank you.
Stacey Jaureguy-Applicant
5021 Stone Avenue
I would like to first of all address the issue of the legal access. I can imagine that they are
interested in why being able to have the ability for the legal access that they don't imagine
to want me to have legal access but as was mentioned I had been in contact with Kevin
Davis, and I don't know if he misunderstood what Mr. Davis has talked about, but we are
still negotiation what we are going to do. I don't feel that it is going to be a problem to get
legal access to our property, and if we can't then we don't get to go anywhere, that's part of
the conditions. So I don't see how that's really an issue here.
18
As far as the pictures that were presented and all the people talking about, oh yeah all of
these other companies, .they do it indoors, the only companies now maybe the Garden Art
because it's very easy to handle versus what we are talking about. They do it inside. But
anybody who is weficasting pre-cast is all outside. Anybody that has shown you a picture,
it is all outside. Anybody that has shown you a picture of indoor is a dry caster. They've got
a million and a half or two million dollar investment in that machine and they are going to
make sure that its inside and it just pops everything out, it basically-does everything for you,
they don't even need much manpower or anything. So it's a completely different and
separate issue for those that use dry casting versus wet casting. All of the other places,
and they showed a picture of saying it represented Southwest Concrete which is our
supplier and that was not the case. It showed product that we don't even manufacture.
Although on that truck it did represent product that we do manufacture or we would
manufacture. Also, as stated in the staff report, this is zoned for outdoor production. Once
again, we are not asking .for any special consideration. It is zoned that way, and once
again, to re-emphasize so that there is no misunderstanding, this has been conditioned to
be paved, so that will be done. That's my comments.
Vice Chair Addington: Question. I know you just discussed manufacturing indoors and all
that, but would you consider putting your facility within an enclosed building to reduce the
noise and filtering it to reduce the concrete dust.
Stacey Jaureguy: Well if it's matter of the noise issue, we have already-been conditioned to
keep the noise at a certain level. We do not anticipate reaching that level, and if we did
reach that level by some error of ours then we wouldn't be able to produce. I understand
that there's going to be, I can't remember which department that they are in. Someone is
going to come out before we receive occupancy to begin our production and their going to
check the perimeter with our machinery going to make sure that we're within the City Codes
and if we're not, then as the conditions state that we have to do whatever barriers or
building or whatever is required in order to make that adjustment and that's what we are
willing to do.
Vice Chair Addington: Just out of curiosity, do you know what the decibel level would be of
that machinery. While it is operating with all of the gravel and sand going through it.
Stacey Jaureguy: Which machine are you talking about?
Vice.Chair Addington:_Whichever one will make the noise?
Stacey Jaureguy: Well our cement mixer is going to make less noise than a diesel truck.
And you know we are going to have a diesel truck coming in and out of there a couple of
times a day and I couldn't tell you what the decibel reading of a diesel truck is, but I would
say that, when we are talking about the perimeter we cannot exceed those measurements
at the,perimeter, I don't think that's going to be a problem at all because this has been part
of your City Code. You've got other industry in the area that are having trucks in and out,
so we don't anticipate any problem with the noise.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay, so you don't know what the decibel level is of the machinery.
Stacey Jaureguy: Well this was asked of us last time and the decibel reading has
-- everything to do with what your surroundings are. I mean, I could tell you what the decibel
reading is right at the, if I stand in front of the concrete machine I could get decibel reading
of that but where it goes up against the ravine, it's going to completely change the decibel
19
reading of what that is. The further away you are, it changes the decibel reading cause it
distributes the noise. So as we discussed with the Planning Department, we don't
anticipate any problem with that and if there is a problem then we're shut down until we
make those adjustments at that time.
Vice Chair Addington: Alright thank you.
Chair Wilson: Any other questions at this time.
Commissioner Comstock: Yes, I have a couple of questions. In regard to the decibels of
that equipment, I am the one that asked that question the last time around and I don't want
to revisit that issue because as we have Mr. Warner will put up buildings that equipment will
no doubt have sound that will bounce off of those buildings and return back adding to the
noise problems and as I am looking at this equipment and I can't find what I was looking at
a minute ago, it's in our packet, looking at the way that the product is loaded into that
equipment, it looks to me that loading of the product is going to produce an awful lot of
noise as well. Sand and gravel or what ever that needs to be put into the machine.
I want to also revisit the issue of capacity, cause I noticed this. as I looked through the
packet and I did for all of you folks who want to know, I did drive by that site and have been
by there twice in the last couple of months. I had been by there this afternoon I drove by
there again and I was looking at the capacity of the machinery and I am rather concerned
that you folks have understated the intention of the capacity. Why would you need such a
large machine with such an increased amount of, I mean your not using even hardly 25%
capacity and its probably less than that capacity of what that machine is capable of running
and what I am concerned about is that if you get two or three shifts going on down there
and you keep that thing running all fourteen or sixteen hours a day, we are going to have
quite a problem.on our hands. Do you want to address why you had to get such a big
machine to run if you don't have any plans on increasing capacity in the future?
Stacey Jaureguy: Sure. That is the smallest machine that we found on the market for
production other than using one of those small barrel type of machines that may produce
three quarters of a yard. The little cement mixers that people pull behind their trucks. We
searched and searched yes it does have a larger capacity that we need. We have two
shifts in the day and it takes a curing time for the morning shift after the concrete is poured,
there is a period of four hours approximately before they can be stripped and another set of
manholes so yeah, we can use that in a capacity of the machine the way it is, but we were
hoping to find something less expensive and work better for our situation and we didn't
want to-purchase from outside sources, having trucks coming in and out and in and out, I
mean to make our own concrete, we're going to make a living with this and we are going to
save money by having our own batch plant, it's the smallest one that we could find and we
searched for months and months for something and no, we are not going to use it to
capacity. We don't even have the ability because concrete takes time to cure.
Commissioner Comstock: I have another question regarding, I'm not real familiar with how
well this works, I was looking at the Daravair 1000 air and training add mixture. Are you
going to be pumping air into.-this or is this something that is a chemical reaction with the
add mix that is added to the concrete?
Stacey Jaureguy: Yeah, all the add mixtures that you have as part of the packet, including
the one that you are mentioning are tubed into the cement mixer and inside the cement
mixer it mixes it together with the cement.
20
Commissioner Comstock: Is it a liquid or an air?
Stacey Jaureguy: No it's a liquid. It's given that name, but it's not air, it is a liquid. And
might make notice there that I know that there are people who are concerned about
environmental issues even with add mixtures, but all the, I don't know what it is off the top
of my head, but it's the ASTM or what the regulating agency is, but all of those has been
highlighted in the brochures for each of those add mixtures view those as non-toxic
materials. So it's not something that the residents need to be concerned about.
Chair Wilson: Thank you. Any other questions.
Commissioner Whitley: On the mixtures, before it gets processed, how is that stored as
such that when the wind kicks up it doesn't stir up dust.
Stacey Jaureguy: Sure. All of the add mixtures and I think there's four that are given that
we are going to be using, there's three or four, they all are contained in the large plastic
barrels that are completely enclosed and the tubing runs to the cement mixer, so there is
no dust, there is nothing that comes out of it, it's a liquid and it's completely enclosed in one
of those, I think blue barrels that you have no doubt seen at storage facilities.
Commissioner. Whitley: So this is a liquid product that it starts out as not as a typical
cement dust.
Stacey Jaureguy: Are you asking about the cement or the add mixtures that he was
mentioning.
i
- ' Commissioner Whitley: I guess whatever part might create dust.
Stacey Jaureguy: Well the cement is enclosed in the silo which has a bag house system at
the top so that when the cement is pumped into the silo, it filters out any dust that would
become particles in the air and then in order to get the cement into the mixer, you've got a
conveyer belt that is completely enclosed that goes into the cement mixer. I mean that's
part of what air quality control looks for. They want to see if everything enclosed, is there
going to be a problem with cement, that's why we didn't have a problem getting the permits
because everything according to what the manufacturer revealed is that everything is
enclosed. So the cement is not an issue, and it would be a problem with air quality control,
they would not allow us to have the permits if it was an issue. I don't know if that answers
your questions:
Chair Wilson: Thank you. Any other questions comments.
Vice Chair Addington: No. But before we close the Public Hearing I do have a question of
the City Traffic Engineer. I don't know if we do that during the Public Hearing or if we can
do that after the Public Hearing is closed.
Chair Wilson: Yes. I think we will close the Public Hearing and introduce him and bring it
back to staff. Anyone else or any new speaker who would like to speak on this particular
subject. Anyone'that has not spoken before, and if they have spoken before, please make
it brief.
21
Rita Schwark
21952 Grand Terrace Road
Judy is very right there are semis going down Grand Terrace Road which is a little wider
and it's a straight shot, it's a short cut to what we are talking about. How much is this going
to cost the City of Grand Terrace in time, labor and money.
Vice Chair Addington: Just out of curiosity, where are these semi trucks going?
INAUDIBLE -
Vice Chair Addington: Staff do you know where they are going?
Chair Wilson: Anyone else who would like to speak for the project.
Janice Machinoff
21816 Vivienda
I don't know anybody that goes into business that stays small. Also, she had made a
comment at one of the last meetings that they were buying a new truck just in case they
needed it. I don't know anybody that buys a truck, pays heavy vehicle tax on it and lets it
sit. They plan to get big. And the amount of product that they can produce'with those
machines and what AQMD sent the permits for initially is a lot of cubic yards. I have the
figures in my folders if you would like to see them.
Jeffrey McConnell
21758 Walnut Avenue
Their permits like I said earlier about the silo and the machine that they are talking about
does not talk about the grinding of the finished product, the construction debris that's in the
staff report, no construction debris and driving the trucks and creating cement dust on
gravel. Inaudible.
Chuck Hornsby
22656 Brentwood Street
This gentleman to my right is obviously very knowledgeable but all he really did was tell you
that it is going to be a very nice cement plant. Which brings me to my point, the real
question-you have to answer tonight when you vote, is whether you want to put a cement
plant in a residential neighborhood whether it's nice or whether its crummy.
Bobbie Forbes
11850 Burns Avenue
The trucks that come through the neighborhood now, I think that many of them are drivers,
don't know if they own their trucks or not but they live at the mobile home park on Grand
Terrace Road and Barton Road I think and many of them live at the Grand Royal Mobile
Park. The other trucks that get lost in our neighborhood are looking for the plumbing yard,
and the Stater Bros. warehouse. If you can remember, Barton Road got.widened a couple
of years ago because of the congestion over by the mobile home park just passed Demitri's
and they had to paint that red because as soon as you widened it, the tractor trailers were
right there to park right on it. And now it gets really congested because they park on the
22
south side of Barton Road to run into the liquor store get cigarettes, whatever they are
getting that kind of thing. I'm not out on the roads at six o clock in the morning however,
am up I hear the noise, however they used to pick up workers on Barton .Road .to help
unload their trucks, so that's part of the congestion over there at Barton Road and Grand
Terrace Road. They are not supposed to be in our neighborhood, but these people that live .
there and they have trucks. So they are cutting through cause that's a way to get through
the .neighborhood looking for the plumbing yard or they get confused, it's very hard to
navigate through that area. The trees are big, the other day I left my house and came back
in 20 minutes and in that time a great big tree in front of Hank's property had been trimmed
by a truck in that 10'minute period. Now I didn't see that but huge limbs were laying in the
street and I'm sure that Hank had to clean them up. This kind of thing, the trucks get
caught on the bridge, they caught around the corner just south of my house where Walnut
and Burns meet and they are trying to get over to the plumbing yard. And one of the
pictures that you-did see was a truck coming out of the plumbing yard to go down to
Terrace just very steep. My car slides with the rocks and gravel coming down off of
Houston's property, it's dangerous, if I miss just for a second I would be in the railroad
tracks probably dead. Somebody is going to get hurt, even with. this redevelopment,
somebody is going to get hurt.
And I commend him, I have seen his plans he did bring them over and we did see them last
week some time. He's going to help the area develop, he is capable of doing that that is a
good thing. But I don't think the Manhole plant is a good thing. That's our issue is the
Manhole Plant. Something else can come here and it will be clean and it will be safer for
our community. Thank you.
Mike Simon
21797 Vivienda
I don't understand why you guy would accept the answer of it's as quiet as a diesel truck as
an acceptable answer when they have been asked several times for a decibel reading. I've
been around for several years of my life and I have seen many diesels. Some diesels are
quiet when they are first bought when they are brand new. After 30 years, they make more
noise, just like this machine.is going to do, it might be quiet when it is first bought and when
it is first put in use but what about five or ten years down the road, is it still going to be just
as quiet.
My next question is more addressed towards. Manhole Builders, and I didn't want to
assume but I 'believe in this instruction manual it says that you have to wear ear plugs or
earphones, how quiet could it be if you do have to wear these earphones?
Eddie Jaureguy-Applicant
5021 Stone Avenue
We forgot to mention that we are in agreement, and I don't think that it was stated that we
are in agreement with the assessment district. I just wanted to mention that.
Chair Wilson: Do we have any other speakers? Just so that for purposes of clarification,
Manhole_ Builders representative did say that they were in agreement and support the
proposed mitigation so far as the assessment district for the road improvements.
Ed Giroux
21918 Vivienda
23
When this all got started, it was Stacey that came over to the house and talked to my wife
and talked to us about the enclosed items and no dust because that was one my concerns
with the wife and my step son. So I let her know that we're the furthest property away that
has to be notified about this plan and that I want to talk to my-neighbors more about that. I
did not know about the grinding process. My neighbor explained to me who is familiar with
this industry about the grinding and the dust.
Again we moved to this community because we like that area and I don't know want to see
more health risks brought to us again as I had mentioned about the wash and all the dust
that comes to that area. I would invite the Manhole people to come out there between May
and August when the wind is kicking up and see how what else it will bring up. It is
amazing and will just be a filter for the company and the rest of the dust .before it goes to
rest of Grand Terrace.
The other thing_is this truck traffic. It is absolutely amazing in our area. They are using it to
go to Newport, it's a different issue, I understand that, but something needs to be done
about Newport Avenue. You can't go down there at nighttime because your afraid your
going to run into one of those filthy dirty trucks that are sitting there because their reflectors
don't even work because they are covered with concrete or whatever they are hauling. And
they also use it as a short cut to get off the 215 to take Barton to'Grand Terrace to Newport
to Jap hill and go on down to the freeway. We have them get stuck on the bridge by our
house. There is a heck of a lot of traffic. Personally I kind of liked the mud at the end
because it put an end to all the teenagers racing down Vivienda trying to take a short cut to
Colton High School.
r I'm all in favor of development if we do what he says, lets just put up checkered flags and
-- tell the kids go. We might need a lot of traffic control that's not an issue. But for me the
concern is the dust. The second concern is the truck traffic, and if you think they are just
going to stay on Terrace Road, that isn't going to happen, they are going to get on Vivienda
and there will be trucks driving off the side. Thank you.
Larvin Houston
21600 Walnut
Our property is the five acres in there and we want to be a part of the assessment district.
We are trying to bring something nice into this neighborhood but people are sure shooting
the heck out of it. They are showing a truck route and they keep bringing up Vivienda, and
I don't know what that has to do with it. I don't know what Terrace Road has to do with this
whole thing. Who cares, it has nothing to do with the project that they are talking about.
INAUDIBLE
The biggest thing is there are people here that are trying to improve the property and trying
to do something for the betterment of the City of Grand Terrace, and there are a lot of
people around here shooting everybody down.
Chair Wilson: Any other speakers. I believe that it's been a longtime, I think we're going to
take a break. So we will take about a 10 minute break. We will close the Public Hearing
and bring it back to the staff for further discussion.
24
I would like to ask the City Traffic Consultant to come forward and answer a few_ questions
for us.
Craig Neustaedter-TEP
City Traffic Engineer
I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Chair Wilson: I would imagine that the Commissioner's have a 4ew questions, but let me
ask mine first. I would like for you to address the. ultimate design for Vivienda and the
surrounding areas, the ultimate design width of the roads and road sections. There has
been a lot of discussion about Circulation Element and I would like to find out what that is.
Craig Neustaedter: Certainly. The section of Vivienda west of Grand Terrace Road is a
local street. I'm going on memory here sir.
Commissioner Comstock: Can we have the overhead put back up of the area please so
that we can get a little better picture.
Chair Wilson: What were talking about in so far as a section that's sustainable given the our
values of the area of traffic.
Craig Neustaedter: We haven't done any work on that just yet.
Chair Wilson: Would it be reasonable to assume that four over six or better might be what
the ultimate design is for that area.
Craig Neustaedter: As a local street that would seem appropriate, yes.
Chair Wilson: I would also like to address the intersection situation so far as the blind
intersection that's been mentioned. I do know that the topography of the area doesn't really
let itself well to a view vista so in relation to traffic so can you address that particular issue?
Craig Neustaedter: There again I would have to acknowledge that this is the first that I
have been made aware of that particular situation. So I haven't had.an opportunity to do a
field review..1 would just like to'note that pursuant to Caltrans guidelines where we do have
a blind intersection, or a site distance obstruction such has been identified in .some slides
that we have .seen .tonight, that cannot be readily mitigated by other means. The
appropriate measure would be to install all way stop sign controls. Of course, a measure
such as that is readily feasible.
Chair Wilson: What is your understanding of the circulation in relation to the project, from
the take off of the rear. You've-got a driveway that's being represented in the rear of the
property. Regardless of the ongoing negotiations with other property owners as far as
access assuming that they are successful in their negotiations what is your understanding
of the circulation that's supposed to take place for this project.
Craig Neustaedter: Based on my review of the project, primarily with City Staff; my
understanding is the project access is to be taken off of Terrace Avenue. I reviewed it from
the perspective that it would be the route of access. Before commenting on alternative
access to the project site, I would like to do a field review and make some observations. I
think as a general rule I have very strong reservations about making access to an industrial
25
site from a residential street. Terrace Avenue is not a residential street and it's an
appropriate route of access to the project site.
Chair Wilson: So would it be correct to state that if there was any traffic on:Vivienda, that
has been described by some of the neighbors, it's a possibility that it would be from people
losing their way, but the main traffic location would be to Terrace Road to it's ultimate
destination as we have been informed where the traffic should go.
Craig Neustaedter: I have been informed by the City- Staff, and by the applicant that the
intended route of access is Terrace Avenue. Of course, there is always a possibility that
vehicles, even large vehicles such as delivery trucks or whatever could get detoured, or lost
and that happens even under the best of circumstances.
Chair Wilson: Would you agree that the 18-24 month time frame as discussed in-relation to
an annexation district for the roads is a doable situation.
Craig Neustaedter: It's feasible, I would tend to weigh it more towards the 24 month side
rather than the 18 month side. I think the 18 month estimate is highly optimistic.
Chair Wilson: I've obviously read the report and from the sake of discussion here in
relation to the existing width and condition of the roads would you say in that the-way they
,are at this point, let themselves hold the traffic that will be introduced to it by this enterprise.
Craig Neustaedter: Yes. Based on the information that I have received from the Applicant
and the City Staff the improvements that are currently proposed are adequate for the
project.
- Chair Wilson: Those are the conditioned improvements that we are talking about.
Craig Neustaedter: Yes Sir.
Chair Wilson: Thank you. Anyone else would like to talk to the traffic engineer in relation to
this project.
Vice Chair Addington: Yes.-Thank you. Craig, the large color exhibit that is over here
against the wall. Have you had a chance to review it.
Craig Neustaedter: This is the first that I have seen of it. Based on the this gentleman's
presentation, it sound like something that's, I think it's important project that's being
proposed that deserves the City's full consideration.
Vice Chair Addington: Since you haven't had a chance to review that, I will ask you another
question, this exhibit is referencing some improvements at Barton Road and Terrace
Avenue. The question I have for you is that in these future improvements that involve the
City, have you had any input into any future improvements at that intersection.
Craig Neustaedter: Not specifically at the intersection. My firm is working with the City of
Grand Terrace and Colton's process with Grant Applications to the bridge improvements
west of the intersection.
Vice Chair Addington: Any idea of what kind of improvements for that bridge.
26
Craig Neustaedter: Replacement.
Vice Chair Addington: With a different width?
Craig Neustaedter: The Grant will not allow for widening but rather than to meet Caltrans
standards, so there would be a widening, but it would be just for, there would not be any
lane additions.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay so it would still remain a two lane road, but instead of the
Model A standards from years ago, it would be more current.
Craig Neustaedter: That's correct.
Vice Chair Addington: In your opinion, a larger vehicle such as the trucks that will,be going
in and out of this facility, could they make a right hand turn from Terrace Avenue right onto
Barton Road without interfering with the outgoing traffic.
Craig Neustaedter: Under the current configuration, I think there is a legitimate concern
about a possible encroachment into the oncoming lane of Barton Road.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay when you say current configuration, you mean the bridge
today, or the bridge tomorrow after we do a widening and rebuilding
Craig Neustaedter: After those improvements are made, those deficiencies will be
corrected. Presuming that we could also encompass the intersection.
r Vice Chair Addington: As a part of this Grant that you assisting the City with, do you have
any time frames as to when any of this bridge work may commence.
Craig Neustaedter: I have to confess that I am unrealistically optimistic about getting that
project approved through Caltrans. We have been working on it for well over 18 months,
and we have encountered delay after delay. I am hopeful that within the next six months
that we will have final approval on the project to proceed with final design and construction.
Perhaps Richard can add something to that.
Richard Shields: I ,have just ordered some new title reports for the five properties that we
have to acquire for the acquisition of right of way for the intersection. I have also spoken to
Commissioner Schneff at the County of San Bernardino who did our original appraisal and
that appraisal now because it's taken so long, I was able to get an approval for a PO for
that. So while we are trying to obtain for these approvals from Caltrans, things like the
environmental review, some of the appraisals and things like that are expiring and we're
having to re-do them again, it is frustrating but we are moving forward and it's my
understanding that the bridge design is almost done, but again, we have to meet all of
Caltrans requirements which are never ending at this point.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay, question for you Richard, you said the bridge design is almost
done, so we're already into engineering on the bridge.
Richard Shields: It is to my understanding that it is real close to being completed. I have
been told from the previous Director, Jerry Glander.
Vice Chair Addington: Have you seen the plans?
27
Richard Shields: I have not personally seen them yet. My understanding is that the plans
are 95% complete.
Vice Chair Addington: Which is a major achievement when your dealing with Caltrans.
Craig Neustaedter: But as Richard has pointed out, we have gotten into a catch 22 situation
where the environmental studies have previously been completed and accepted by
Caltrans. Due to the duration and delay of final project, they are now expiring and will have
to be re-done. It is a very frustrating situation and we'll have to keep pushing for the
project. That's all I can tell you.
Chair Wilson: Do they need to be re-done or do they need to be re-freshened.
Craig Neustaedter: I think it's more a matter of re-freshening. It's not like we have to start
from scratch but we will have to update them.
Chair Wilson: Any of the other Commissioner's have any questions for Craig.
Commissioner Whitley: One question. Just want to confirm, I think you answered it in
Commissioner Addington's question. On the Terrace Avenue road if I am understanding
correctly it is your opinion that the current width of that they would not be additionally
widening that at all and so it's current width of what ever it is 18-20 feet would be adequate
to serve this project.
Craig Neustaedter: The improvements that were specified by the City which I understand is
basically pot holing or filling the pot holes on the road, improving the pavement condition,
covering a portion of the roadway, providing direct side access with integrating granite and
creating a smooth travel surface, given the traffic volume that this project is proposing to or
is expecting to generate improvements seem to be appropriate.
Commissioner Comstock: Couple of questions, one more time, did you say that you did not
do a field inspection.
Craig Neustaedter: I have reviewed Terrace Avenue and have reviewed the route of access
for the site as proposed.
Commissioner Comstock: Do you know or can you give an estimate of the amount of time
from start to completion of construction of the bridge that they are planning.
Craig Neustaedter: I would think that it's about an 18 month project. After funding.
Commissioner Comstock: In your consideration of the proposed project, did you take into
consideration the year and a'half or perhaps even longer if any delays were to come. The
routing of truck traffic along Terrace Avenue coming on to the Barton Road intersection, do
you have any consideration of looking at that in regard to the new bridge and the
construction that's going to be taking place. My concern here is that there is going to be a
lot of safety issues with traffic along that intersection during construction.
Craig Neustaedter: Customarily what happens is once you have an approved plan you
proceed with what's called a traffic control plan and it would be at that stage that you would
address any sort of modifications that would be needed specifically at Terrace Avenue and
28
Barton Road in order to accommodate project traffic. . Given the low volume. of traffic,
believe that it's possible to readily accommodate this traffic via that route.
Chair Wilson: One more question, maybe a couple here. So we're a local 36 foot wide and
then it turns into a collector type of street on Terrace Avenue, is that what that is?
Craig Neustaedter: Terrace Avenue is also a-local street. It is not a residential street, so by
default that we would expect that curb to curb would be 36 feet.
Chair Wilson: So eventually, it's planned for a 36 foot wide curb to curb. Why would it not
be appropriate for it to be a 36 foot width at this time for full service, I have never seen a
road that's actually been labeled as a driveway at 18 foot wide, so I am curious how it
qualifies for service, other than the fact that's it's grandfathered in.
Craig Neustaedter: I. reviewed that situation with Mr: Glander, and unfortunately he is not
here to discuss that matter, but it was his opinion that given the low volume of traffic that it
would be difficult to justify significant improvements to the roadway and put the burden of
those improvements or weight on this particular project, I agree with the viewpoint and I
think that the proposal that's been discussed to create an assessment district which would
share a responsibility for those improvements would be the right way to go.
Commissioner Whitley: I have one question, and I'm not sure who's the best to answer this,
but I will ask the question: If the assessment district is not formed, which I concur I think it's
the best way to get these improvements done, what kind of a time frame might there be if
there is a time frame. at all for making what would otherwise be considered appropriate
street improvements in this area.
Craig Neustaedter: I think from a Capital Improvement budget standpoint, currently I think
there is no:project on the books for the City to make these improvements. There is no time
frame to expect that they would be done.
Chair Wilson: Perhaps,we could ask our staff to answer that question or elaborate.
Planning Director Koontz: The way we have approached the Conditions of Approval, we
looked at it with and without an assessment district. We have talked about it and the
Applicant has agreed to an assessment district, but just in case, wrote a condition which is
Condition 19 where it says that 'in the event that one is not created, the following will be
done' which essentially the requirements of Mr. Neustaedter out of one of his letters plus
we have also added there that the legal access issues and all that, that's required no matter
what happens. And Item 19D: 'The Applicant shall pay a fair share of contribution to the
City for ultimate improvements to Terrace Avenue as determined by the City Engineer'. So
we want this project to pay it's fair share whether an assessment district is formed or not.
That alone, the amount of money associated with that would be a big issue to deal with and
determine whether we should go forward with this application for the project. So we've hit
them r up for the money that they need to give us to improve at least their share of the road.
Vice Chair Addington: Question for that. Then in Condition 19, does the Applicant have to
do anything with Terrace Avenue as far as re-paving it or overlaying it or anything like that.
I didn't see that specifically in the Conditions.
29
Planning Director Koontz: I thought I put it in there, if not it can certainly be added.
Although that is covered under the blanket Conditions of Approval Item 16 from Craig's
letter.
Chair Wilson: I understand. Which means basically that you follow the traffic engineer's
recommendations. I believe those are all the questions I have. Thank you. I have a few
questions for Staff. I guess this is more of a statement and maybe you can concur for us.
We have just touched on the legal access issue, our understanding or at least my
understanding is that in order for this project to proceed towards an approval of it's site
plan, and if that's not correct, please correct me. The legal evidence of legal access would
be required regardless of whether negotiations are at this time.
Planning Director Koontz: That's Condition Number 15, which nothing gets issued on this
project. No permits at all unless legal access would be to the satisfaction of the City and the
City Attorney.
Chair Wilson: Can you explain to me how far the access, the responsibility for legal access
proceeds from the property line because to me, an island in the State of California doesn't
exist other than planning and zoning matters of course, but in this particular case, I see a
site plan that shows a property line and it shows a rear access that is being negotiated but
it doesn't show how it gets out from there to the predominant access that's proposed for the
circulation.
Planning Director Koontz: Well the way the Conditions reads it says: 'Prior to issuance of
any City permits, the applicant shall,provide evidence to the satisfaction to the City legal
access is provided from the subject site, westerly to Terrace Avenue.'
Chair Wilson: Next question, not having to do with access but with hours of operations.
What is the City's understanding of the hours of operation, the days, so forth.
Planning Director Koontz: We have conditioned to the hours of operations under the City's
Noise Ordinance. However, you have right and ability to put any sort of hours of operation
you feel appropriate as a condition of this project.
Chair Wilson: I would like to address the issue that was brought up in relation to the flood.
am aware of the fact that the project is literally 1,300 feet away from what is considered a
not endangered but a disturbed body of water. Which isn't the best course in an army
corps type of setting but there has been discussion in the paper work that we have about
the FEMA map. The FEMA map shows mapped areas where you have 100 year old storm,
potential 10 year storm and so on for potential flooding. I believe the reason why this was
introduced was because there was concern that was voiced in previous testimony that the
area might have a potential for flooding and would therefore distribute toxic silts or what
ever through that flood operation. Our understanding at this point or at least the
recommendation or at least in the Negative Declaration that there has not been any
historical evidence that there is a potential for flood in this project. What is the backup for
that.
Planning Director Koontz: We contacted the Flood Control District, specifically about this
site and whether they considered it to be a flood hazard on site. They said historically they
hadn't seen anything, and with the improvements that were made along the river channel
itself there are a lot of new dykes, the Seven Oaks Damn has helped a lot too, and they did
not see this as being a flood hazard at this point.
30
Chair Wilson: Which means in essence they have not updated their flood control flood map
which is not unusual. So it sounds like there have been some changes or improvements to
the flood zone that might prohibit any discharge back into the water body.
Planning Director Koontz: Also in addition to that, in my conversations to Mr. Hodgden,
some of his property from what we understand continue to be in a flood hazard area and he
is looking into mitigation on that, and improvement of the additional levies.
Chair Wilson: The noise circumstance. Has there been any discussion with the applicant in
relation to machining work that might take place that might generate extraordinary noise in
so far as enclosures.
Planning Director Koontz: We have talked about noise on numerous occasions. The one
comment from the public that we're a little confused on is the grinding of materials on the
site. You may want to ask the applicant to get up and explain if there is any grinding.
We're not aware of any.
Chair Wilson: So.far as the actual machinery itself, and the noise potential, I'm familiar with
the kind of machinery this is, there are a lot of grinding of rocks. I understand the concern
of dumping rocks into it and making noise and so forth. What research have we done,
beyond, I think what we are concerned about is the relying on the 65 decibel rating. To me
we weren't able to rely on that completely on that in relation to the little race car track that's
in the middle of town. So what we did is the City went out and to do a noise study, to not
circumnavigate but actually verify what the assumptions were on what has the city done in
relation to that, to be able to determine that we're not going to be putting ourselves in
position of damage control.
Planning Director Koontz: We have in the past asked for what ever noise studies we could
get and one of the issues that I must agree with you is that noise studies are very site
specific issue depending on terrain. In this case you have a terrain issues, you've got the
railroads on both sides, and you've got La Cadena Avenue and a variety of other issues.
We have contacted a couple of different agencies, actually, Jeff Gollihar who was with us at
that time, when he was the lead planner on this. He had contacted a couple of different
agencies trying to get information, and he said that he didn't think it was going to be an
issue. But to cover the base we have provided conditions concerning abiding by the noise
ordinance. Staff does have noise meters and we intend to go out there from the very
beginning and monitor and see what's really happening, and based upon the noise
ordinance we can require them to buffer things.
Chair Wilson: And our recourse would be to shut them down.
Planning Director Koontz: We would have the right to do that, yes.
Commissioner Comstock: Are there any manufacturing operations that have the same
equipment that will be used here that we might be able to visit. Get some kind of a meter
reading to find out in various distances how many decibels are being produced in the whole
operations.
Planning Director Koontz: There again, the issue is that there may be a very similar piece
of equipment out there but you don't know how it's being operated or what the surrounding
conditions are. You could be out in a very large and open area with lots of trucks. They
31
submitted pictures of some of the bigger facilities like over in Rialto, I can guarantee you if I
stand out there just because of all the activities are going on around there we are going to
have a very high reading. So we can do that, but I'm not sure what we will gain from it.
Chair Wilson: And of course the applicant is represented a particular noise level and we
have plenty of recourse. Another issue brought up so far as fire identification, in other
words emergency identification, with regard to addressing, would you tell us how we
address items in-this specialty location.
Planning Director Koontz: That would be to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. The fire
department has conditioned this project, they will review all the applications they have to
sign off of final approval before any'permits are issued. If they are not satisfied, they will not
sign off. So it's up to the applicant, the City and the fire department to work together to
resolve that. -The big issue is it still involves a legal access issue. Once they get legal
access there may be some ways that we can work with the fire department, but it's a
condition the fire department is going to require it, and we are not going to argue with them.
Chair Wilson: Last but not least, the dust and pollutants issue, can you talk to us a little bit
about AQMD regulations.
Planning Director Koontz: The AQMD has their baseline standards where they have
placed thresholds. They have a complete handbook on how to evaluate projects under
CEQA. The consultant who did the study is well versed in that. I've seen numerous studies
and this individual is very good at it. Everything is based on the standards established by
CEQA... They evaluated dust and construction of the site plus emissions from the vehicles
including the employee vehicles for the construction company to determine whether there is
an impact. Those both earned well far below the threshold standards to peak AQMD's
interest. We then looked at the equipment, dust on site, PM10, they have long term
operation, plus truck conditions from vehicles from both trucks and employee vehicles, long
term operations. We compared those to the standards and we determined that those are
also very far below the threshold standards.
Chair Wilson: In relation to the zoning question about who was here first and where
everything was. I know that at a point, the County backed their trucks up to the City of
Grand.Terrace and dumped all of their paperwork into the City of Grand Terrace, that's
because the County originated this area. So the City of Grand Terrace was within the
County boundaries. What you have to thank for this point in relation to the original zoning
and incompatibility that seems to be here was the fact that there was a County Jurisdiction
within this area and it wasn't the same type of concept there also say 25 years ago,
planning jurisdictions did not exist. There wasn't a lot of adherence to those kinds of
circumstances. What we have inherited is the City of Grand Terrace is a mixture and this is
not the only place this happens, there are some areas in the City which are actually zoned
to protect us. In the case on some of the circumstances down there on La Cadena where
the strip joints are, there was enough foresight for this city that there was zoning that was
created that made it undesirable to do business in particular areas back in the industrial
areas, and not too far from this area there is zoning that is quote unquote conducive to that
use ,but its not marketable. So there has been some insight in relation to that in this
particular case. We have a residential island in the middle which is called a non-
conforming use or an existing grandfathered use. So back in 1980 some odd, when this
General Plan was revamped, the use that was designated for the whole area should
somewhat elect to change the residency is an M2 zone, and so maintain that residential
situation will not happen over a period of 100 years unless everybody stays here. That's
32
the difficulty that happens in an area that's been around for awhile. That doesn't mean it's
good or bad that way, it just means that it addresses the issue of zoning and that's what
happened back in that last General Plan. So all of you that are here, I congratulate you for
being here because you are part of this process. 20 years 'ago, this process also took
place and at that point, that's when this area was zoned an M2 Zone and there are other
areas in the City that may seem a little bit incompatible. There will be times when the
General Plan is introduced for an update, that's the best time to jump up and say hey wait a
minute, your not going to zone this my residential house to M2 or lets change this back
where it belongs. Right now, this body is encumbered by is an M2 Zone with legal non-
conforming uses in that area. That's the only.questions I had, I will turn it over to the rest of
the Planning Commissioners for staff.
Vice Chair Addington: I have a few questions. Stepping back a few questions to the legal
access. In reading the attachment for the City Attorneys letter, basically they are locked
out of their property and if they try to go to anything but a residential use is that correct?
Planning Director Koontz: Right now the prescriptive right according to the City Attorney's
letter is for residential uses only. The existing residence.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay so now they are forced to negotiate some sort of access off of
Terrace Avenue.
Planning Director Koontz: Right.
Vice Chair Addington: Is there anything in the conditions here where if they can't get that
access can they still take some sort of access no matter how expensive it will be off of
Vivienda. I mean let's look at all possibilities here.
Planning Director Koontz: The conditions as they read right now states specifically that
they have to provide legal access from Terrace Way.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay but under the laws of the State of California where they can't
be landlocked, can they come back and try and take access off of Vivienda.
Planning Director Koontz: They have legal access from Vivienda but not practical access.
Vice Chair Addington: That's why no matter how expensive it might be to build that road
down there.
Planning Director Koontz: One of the issues that we've heard time and time again is truck
traffic on Vivienda. The condition the way it reads now it says truck traffic on Terrace
Avenue.
Vice Chair Addington: The other thing that the attachment of the letter mentions is a quiet
title action. I know what quiet title is and it's process, what I don't know is. per the current .
caseload of the courts, how long it takes to perfect that quiet title action. Does staff have
idea of that question?
Planning Director Koontz: I am not an attorney either.
33
Commissioner Whitley: I am an.attorney and to answer that question, I think one of the big
questions with that would be whether it's a contested action. If it's a contested action it can
take considerable years. If it's uncontested it can be really quick.
Vice Chair Addington: The other question I had on the bridges I knew through passed
discussion and information of the Planning Commission that old steel bridge which would
be the east rail line next to the freeway was going to be replaced someday, but I didn't
know about the new one next to La Cadena Avenue. Are these two bridges going
concurrently? What's a little history on these two bridges here.
Building Director Shields: I just know that the bridge that's on our side is going first. Now, in
Colton, their deciding that they are going to do their portion of the bridge on the La Cadena
side, I've heard talk of that also, but the City of Grand Terrace is the lead agency for the
bridge over railroads so they would have to already be in design with some of their bridge
items, they would have to be in design already.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay; question that I have then if Colton proceeds and they rebuild
that bridge next to La Cadena and I'm,going to assume it's a rebuild, tear down the bridge
and build a new one. During this construction time, how do the residents of Grand Terrace
go west and on to La Cadena or can they?
Building Director Shields: I don't think that they would be able to, there would be a detour
into another area. That's part of building the bridge, is laying out the defined detours and
providing that information to the local residents and the businesses well in advance. That's
part of Caltrans stuff.
Vice Chair Addington: Okay so if that bridge is out, is there any thought as to how the
vehicles of this business would be routed through the neighborhoods.
Planning Director Koontz: That would be subject to the design engineers program subject
to approval by the City.
Commissioner Whitley: As a follow up of the question of the AQMD process, is there any
kind of ongoing monitoring that is required by AQMD that will satisfy where things are
occurring in the fashion as expected.
Planning Director Koontz: Under certain cases, there are inspections if there is something
that is going to be an issue. A lot of what they do is respond to complaints, and I'm sure if
there's any dust out there, there will be complaints and AQMD is very good at responding.
Commissioner Whitley: So if there is a wind that is picking up dust off of maybe not the
machinery, but generally on the property, that would be something in which could be a
complaint and see that AQMD would investigate.
Planning Director Koontz: They have citation authority, they have the authority to close
projects down without question.
Chair Wilson: Any further questions of staff.
Commissioner Comstock: It' was mentioned earlier by a couple of residents regarding
Grand Terrace Road, is there any plans of sidewalks for that road?
34
Planning Director Koontz: Not at this time, that is something that if requested can be put
into consideration at the City Council's budget hearings.
_ Commissioner Comstock: One of the other questions is regarding the AQMD Study. It
concludes that the sand and dust in similar operations in other plants, I don't know if you
would have that information or not.
Planning Director Koontz: They evaluated the equipment itself. They looked at the
equipment that is proposed to being used and they used the AQMD guidelines for looking
at long term dust emissions from the sites.
Vice Chair Addington: Regarding the conditions of approval, the open storage areas. We
have a condition where there will be a rock aggregate or are they allowed to be left as a
native soil.
Planning Director Koontz: There is a condition in there, let me look real quick. There is not
one,that specifically states that but we can add one. We do have Item 26 where the project
shall provide dust control measures for all activities to reduce potential impacts to a level of
insignificance complying with local and state agencies including SCAQMD. We do have
Item 27 which talks about dust controls measures, shall be taken on all roadways and
access points during hours of operation, including access easement of Terrace Avenue.
Vice Chair Addington: The other question I have is on Condition 20, in the event the
assessment district is created, it doesn't look like we're going to require them to pave the
interior driveways, we're conditioning them to go to aggregate base, slag base or asphalt
grindings. Am I misunderstanding that?
Planning Director Koontz: That was one of the original conditions we pulled off of the last
one. Number 17 which is all on site driveways shall be paved with asphalt concrete.
Vice Chair Addington: Well, if we have a conflict in the conditions here, wouldn't now be a
good time to clear up any conflicts.
Planning Director Koontz: Right. These interim conditions that we are talking about came
from the last Planning Commission meeting. I believe it was you directly who requested
that they pave all the driveways on site. Now if you would like to put some paving on the
access road itself as an interim improvement, then you have a right to condition it.
Vice Chair Addington: All right thank you.
Chair-Wilson: Any other question or comments. The Chair would entertain a motion.
MOTION PC-43-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to Deny SA-05-06 and E-
05-04 for lack of access to the property.
Commissioner Comstock seconded the motion
MOTION
VOTE PC-43-2005: 3-1-1-0
Commissioner Whitley Voting No
Commissioner Bidney Absent
35
ADJOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING 10:20 Pm
CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION
• Information to Commissioners
None
• Information from Commissioners
Vice Chair Addington asked if a post office drop box will be installed next door to
City Hall as there was one there before.
Planning Director Koontz replied that it would be at the discretion of the Postmaster
on whether or not a new box will be placed there. -
Vice Chair Addington asked when the Savon will be opening.
Planning Director Koontz replied that it should be open in early Spring of 2006.
Miguel's is currently in plan check.
ADJOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 10:30 PM
NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 2005
Respectfully Submitted, Approved By,
Gary Koontz, Pldfining Director Doug Wilson, Chairman
Planning Commission
36